D 2 1 Objectives KPIs Final

Project Objectives & KPI
Deliverable n: 2.1
EC-GA n
Project full title:
249812
Transmission system operation with large penetration of Wind and other renewable Electricity sources in Networks by means of innovative Tools and Integrated Energy Solutions
Document info sheet

Document Name: Responsible Partner: WP: Task: Deliverable n Revision: Revision Date: Author/s: Project Objective & KPI Red Elctrica WP #2 Tasks 2.1, 2.1 & 2.3 2.1 02 21st December 2010 See details below
Diffusion list
Public
Approvals
Version approved by TC by written procedure on December 20th, 2010.
Name
R.Veguillas, M.Hermosa, V.McGrail, K. Edlund Anne-Marie Denis N.Detlefsen, J.B.Topgaard, N.H. Hansen Ch.Druet, J.L. Fernndez, M.Lorenzo, V.Gonzlez, J.Garca, P.Srensen, N.A.Cutululis J.Van den Berg V. Gonzlez V. Gonzlez
Company
IBR DONG RTE Energinet.dk Elia REE IIT-Comillas RIS DTU Tennet REE REE
Author/s
Task Leader WP Leader
Documents history
Revision Date Main modification Author
Executive Summary
This document represents the first and main outcome of Work Package 2 Specifications and requirements for the demonstrations. It means to state not only general objectives but also specific and measurable targets for all demos (including work package 17) in line with overall project objectives and provide a detailed and comprehensive overview of the subsequent analysis to be done in the rest of Horizontal Workpackages (HW), namely WP 15 and WP 16, in order to assess the economic impact and the replication potential at European level of the technologies tested in TWENTIES. All demos and HW participants have undertaken a revision in depth of the activities outlined in the DoW so as to pinpoint in this deliverable the following information
1. Project Objectives, expected impacts and barriers to be overcome:

Starting from the Project Objectives, in this section of the document each demo description has been elaborated beyond the one in the Description of Work, including decisions and specifications elaborated during the first months of the project. In brief, the main project objectives are: to demonstrate that active and reactive power control and voltage/reactive control in the system can be performed effectively by aggregated wind farms. to show at large scale that aggregating DER (including wind production and flexible loads) can lead to a more secure and efficient electricity system. to provide the critical building blocks of DC grid control and protection strategies and DC breakers which will allow guaranteeing the security of future HVDC messed grids. to demonstrate that adequate coordination mechanisms between offshore wind farms management and available hydro power capacity in neighboring systems brings viable solutions to securely control the power balance during offshore storm passages. to demonstrate that adequate coordination mechanisms between Dynamic Line Rating, Power Flow Controlling Devices and Wide Area Monitoring Systems (WAMS) bring more flexibility to the power system within affordable capital and operational costs. to demonstrate that alternative operation parameters provided by Dynamic Line Rating and FACTS technology, do bring flexibility, do enhance security and do expand the capability of the network to evacuate more wind power on a regional basis. to assess the impact, barriers and solutions needed to upscale the demonstration results. to assess the benefits of replicating the obtained results throughout the entire pan European interconnected transmission system. to disseminate the obtained results widely enough for an early take-up of scaling and replication rules by the stakeholders
In this section another two main issues, Expected Impact and Barriers to overcome, have been also revisited. ii
Project Objectives & KPI Expected Impact: Demo 1. SYSERWIND Impact on wind turbine performance: To figure out the effects on the turbines components in terms of mechanical stresses, electrical losses, life of components... Impact on wind farm components and performance, in terms of loss of profit, CAPEX and OPEX, electrical infrastructure losses, life of components, etc. at Wind Farm level... Impact of the wind farms operation in Clusters: impact of the performance of the clusters in the TSO Grid. Aggregations of wind farms will be controlled in a coordinated way to carry out frequency control mechanisms and demonstrate that reactive power regulation can be achieved at cluster level Impact on the grid: Three clusters acting to fulfil higher level requests, like a voltage profile set point, will be assessed to value the capacity to act as a conventional generation point. Thus, this is to consider cluster nodes as PV nodes instead of PQ nodes in the load flow planning. Economic Impact of the active and reactive power control, under two different perspectives: The wind power producer and the whole system. Demo 2. DERINT Physical outcomes: A 100 MW VPP system operating in the Danish power system. 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. Impacts on society: The increase in supply of ancillary services will decrease the price, thereby lowering the overall electricity cost for the consumer. Demo 3. DC-Grid Technical Impact: Technical assessment and identification of target scenarios for a feasible HVDC network in 2020, 2030 and beyond. Grid topology Impact: An indicative roadmap for building an off-shore network at European scale, and rational criteria to define and optimise scenarios for an off-shore target network on the European shore. Demo 4. Storm Management Impact on wind turbine performance: To assess the large scale consequences of a more demanding work conditions as result of the implementation of improved storm controller in the wind turbines. Impact on balancing management in storm conditions through the implementation of new control strategies (based on improved storm forecasting and wind turbines performance) during storms; maintaining the system security even in case of disconnection of large amounts of offshore wind power. iii
Project Objectives & KPI Impact of hydro system control, as result of the implementation of new strategies for using hydro power to balance the imbalances from storms at different timescales Impact of coordinated action, as result of the implementation of new strategies for coordinated actions initiated by the TSO for controlling the storm based on all the above. Demo 5. NETFLEX Impact of Dynamically Forecasting Line Ratings: The aim is to figure out the expected increase in overhead line capacities that will result in increased overall capacities, a.o. NTCs, while keeping a similar reliability level. Impact of Controlling Smartly PSTs and HVDC links: The aim is also to figure out, through a pan-European coordination of controllable devices that considers the sequential aspect of system operation (future needs for actions may not be jeopardised by present actions), the expected decrease in close-to-the-limit flows that will result in increased NTCs, while keeping a similar reliability level. Combined impact of these technologies: The aim is to figure out the expected increase in NTCs resulting from combining Dynamic Forecast of Line Rating and Smart Control of Controllable Devices that will allow accommodating additional wind generation while keeping a similar reliability level. Impact on the stability of the system: Finally the aim is to figure out if the resulting increase in flows does not endanger system stability by monitoring the system using WAMS. Demo 6. FLEXGRID Impact on Grid Management and Operation, allowing a more intensive use of the existing assets. Impact on Grid Planning by considering RTTR and specially OLC among the different options for the network expansion in the planning studies. Impact on Wind energy integration: As a result of the aforementioned impacts, it is expected significant reducction of risk of wind power curtailments caused by lack of evacuation capacity. WP 17. Off-shore barriers Impact on understanding of the national and regional approaches to licensing of offshore interconnectors: As result European TSOs will be provided with tools for simplifying the licensing process and strengthening the interaction with the competent regional and national authorities. Impact on Regulatory Frameworks: Legislators and authorities are provided with input from the practitioners' point of view on improving legislation and procedures. Economic Impact, by reducing time and man power resources devoted for licensing of interconnectors . This leads to more interconnectors being established and in turn faster and cheaper development of the pan-European transmission grid, which contributes to the integration of more wind energy. Barriers to be overcome in order to succeed in the prosecution of the DEMOS objectives whatever it might be their nature (e.g. technical, administrative, legal, market structure based). iv
Project Objectives & KPI Demo 1. SYSERWIND Technical: It will be necessary to implement new tools at turbine and wind farm level. 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 Regulatory: the current market structure for secondary regulation is itself a barrier from the forecast point of view which also affects to the available reactive power for voltage control. Demo 2. DERINT Technical: Scalability of the IT platform and optimization algorithms, transform LU capabilities into ancillary services, providing a standardized solution for LU control. Regulatory: By proposing the necessary adjustements on the Danishs ancillary market to handle consumption units thereby making it possible for the VPP to act on the market, and the TSO be willing to allow an aggregation of small units to deliver ancillary services. There can exist limits for the implementation of the demonstration concepts in other countries, where current regulatory framework does not consider aggregation of technologies as a valid actor for ancillary services markets. Socio-economical: Customers may not be willing to participate or not consider VPP attractive enough; existing DONG Energy processes may not be capable to handle customers; the LU may be placed in an area not suitable for usage during certain hours a day; the LU may technically not be suitable for connecting to the VPP. Demo 3. DC-Grid Technical: The new HVDC interconnection schemes have to be compatible with available technologies on one side, but also be securely operable by TSOs, contribute to offering additional capacities to the European electricity market and provide optimised operating conditions to wind producers. Moreover robust control and efficient protection are the crucial barriers to be overcome by TSOs, manufacturers and wind producers together. Coordination and international cooperation: All initiatives today are local or bilateral. A broader approach would allow for more coordination for wind development and operation in Europe, leading to more efficient investments and a higher security level for the DC / AC hybrid power system. Demo 4. Storm Management Technical: The turbines should operate in more demanding conditions with new storm control system. Coordination and international cooperation: The improved strategies for storm handling will involve several TSO to mobilize sources from different systems which require strong coordination procedures. Regulatory: The different balancing strategies should fit as much as possible into the market mechanisms. Demo 5. NETFLEX Technical: The accuracy and reliability of the new overhead line capacities forecaster must fulfil the demands to be valuable for system operation. v
Project Objectives & KPI Coordination and international cooperation: The coordination of the tap positions of PSTs and control of HVDC links is a sensitive issue because the impact on the flows exceeds the control zones of the TSOs concerned. Demo 6. FLEXGRID Technical: New RTTR devices, based on continuous monitoring of the conductors temperature through the complete overhead line should comply with safety standards and laboratory test to guarantee that they do not reduce the reliability of the OHL where it is installed. In the case of OLC device, it is required a detailed engineering work to ensure the quality of the electrical signal and guarantee the correct durability and reliability of the adopted solution. Regulatory: Any innovative HV device to be installed in demonstrate the real advantages over existing similar devices, and OLC device would be considered from the regulatory transmission element to be taken into account within the processes. WP 17 Regulatory: The main barrier is the existence of heterogeneous or absence of regulation for this projects. The WP outlines practices and legislative initiatives for simplifying and shortening the period of licensing of offshore interconnectors with a transnational set-up and to harmonise regulatory frameworks. the transmission grid must as result of the project RTTR point of view as any other grid planning and operation
Finally, this section describes the set of KPIs with correspondent target values for each DEMO. It is worth remarking that all KPIs at this level (DEMO level) are intended to be as much as possible purely technical and linked to the DEMOSs performance in contrast with those defined at task force and project level which will try to anticipate the impact and potential of those results. The complete list of proposed KPIs (in total there are 48 KPIs covering Demo 1 to 6 and WP 17) is included in Table 1 in Section 4 of this Executive Summary.
2. Project KPIs:
As it has been mentioned, in this section are defined the KPIs at project and task force level. They have been formulated in order to assess the impact that TWENTIES results would have on different system parameters which might be directly evaluated in economic terms. This impact will be captured by comparing those parameters in two different scenarios: the default case used to describe the situation where no changes are introduced (business as usual) and the scenario where TWENTIES solutions have been extensively deployed into the system. They will also provide an integrated global assessment of the impact that all task forces will have at EU level complementing the analysis of the economic impact that the demonstrations have on a national level in the countries where they are performed. The complete lists of Project level (4 KPIs) and Task Force level KPIs (43 KPIs) are included in Table 3 and 2 respectively, in Section 4 of this Executive Summary.
vi
Project Objectives & KPI It is also remarkable that the establishment of a target value for these KPIs is not possible at this stage, as in most cases the purpose of the work to be carried out in WP15 and WP16 is directly focused to assess the economic impact (unknown in advance and without an a priori preferred value).
3. Tools and methodologies for impact assessment:

Finally, in this section it has been thoroughly described for each DEMO how their outputs are going to be used for Project and Task Force KPIs calculation in terms of methodologies, data requirements, inputs/outputs among the different involved partners, a detailed description of the tools and models to be used and the limitations of each assessment. Due to the specific characteristics of each Demo different tools (ROM Model, PSS/E, ANTARES, CorWind, Continental, WILMAR, etc) and level of detail in power system data will be used, however the conceptual framework of the impact assessment is harmonised in order to ensure the coherence and compatibilitty of the evaluation of results from the different Demos. This conceptial framework comprises the following five steps: a) Definition of the relevant national and European scenarios for the base case (do nothing) in 2020 and in some Demos also for 2030. b) Adaptation of the comon scenarios to the specific requirements of each tool and physical phenomena that will be evaluated. c) Assessment of the technical effectiveness of the different measured proposed as result of the Demo outcomes by simulating the operation of the system with and without the new features tested in the demonstration, and comparing the results. This assessment must provide information regarding investment in grid or generation facilities that can be delayed or avoided thanks to the new technological solutions provided within each demo and the increase in the amount of wind power that the system will be able to cope without jeopardizing the system security, or reduction of active power losses in the grid. d) Translate the conclussions of the technical assessment into financial resources. The economic aspects of network reliability and controllability, as well as avoided CO2 emissions will be also taken into consideration e) Economic assessment must consider the gain in welfare for the whole European society but also the direct impact on involved market actors (in this case mainly Wind farm promoters and Grid operators) As previously mentioned this is the general framework and the specific approach to be done within each Demo is described in section 4 of the document. The whole document constitutes a coherent system that will allow for an objective measurement of the project results from the technical point of view and it will bring clear hints about the economic impact and replication potential of each solution tested in TWENTIES which will provide a key feedback to establish the main drivers for future policies at EU level.
vii
4. KPIs Summary:
Table 1: DEMO LEVEL

Nr
DEMO
Code
KPI.D1.1.1
KPI
Active power availability for upwards and downwards secondary power reserve. Dynamic response of the wind energy AGC regulator. Availability of the offer for upwards and downwards secondary power reserve. Accuracy of the available reactive power reported to the TSO dispatch centre. Dynamic performance and accuracy of the reactive power regulation according to the requirements for the conventional generation. Accuracy of the voltage set point achievement, or reactive power saturation if the set point is not achievable Dynamic performance of the voltage regulation according to the requirements for the conventional generation Accuracy in the requested voltage profile achievement. Dynamic performance of the wide area voltage regulation according to the requirements for the conventional generation.
Description
Time during the maximum/minimum active power regulation level is maintained Achievement of the dynamic requirements to participate in the Spanish secondary frequency control of the system, assessed every 4 seconds: Constant time of the AGC regulator Active power increase/reduction according the set point requested Percentage of achievement of the active power set point requested each 4 seconds Percentage of produced reactive power samples, during one hour, within a certain band around the maximum and minimum available reactive power reported to the TSO.
Target Values
The maximum/minimum active power level is maintained at least 15 minutes
Units
Min
KPI.D1.1.2
AGC regulator dynamic response should be: An equivalent first order system with a 100 seconds time constant minimum (63% of the set point value is achieved in less than that time). The total active power value produced will not be higher (power increase) or lower (power decrease) than the required secondary frequency control power, by each sampling cycle (4 seconds). 90% of the requests received during each hour achieved.
MW / seconds
KPI.D1.1.3
% (MW)
KPI.D1.2.1
75 % of the produced reactive power samples, measured during one hour, within 10 % around the reported available reactive power value.
% (MVAr)
KPI.D1.2.2
Regulation band and settling time (ts) of the cluster reactive power regulator since a set point is received.
Steady-state error within 10 % around the set point value (if achievable) and settling time less than 5 minutes.
% (MVAr)
KPI.D1.2.3
Percentage of cluster voltage samples, during one hour, within a certain band around the requested set point value.
75 % of the voltage samples, measured during one hour, within 2.5 kV around the requested set point. If the set point is not achievable, the reactive power support from the cluster must equal to the saturation value.
% (kV) or YES/NO if set point not achievable
KPI.D1.2.4
Settling time (ts) of the cluster voltage regulator since a set point is received in the cluster or since the perturbation occurs. The settling time is defined as the time to reach the 5 % band around the set point.
Settling time less than 5 minutes
seconds
KPI.D1.2.5
Voltages at the buses according to the issued set points, assessed in a one hour period.
75% of the voltage samples during one hour, that the voltage is reached within 2.5 kV around the requested set point. If the set point is not achievable, the reactive power support from the cluster equals to the saturation value.
KPI.D1.2.6
Settling time (ts) of the voltage network buses since the set point is received by CORE.
Settling time less than 5 minutes.
Minutes
viii
DEMO
Code
KPI
Description
Year 1
Target Values
Year 2
40 total 20 B2C 50 in cluster sites 6 50/ 25 1,000/ 200 3 MVAr
Units
Year 3
>100 total (B2B) 2,000 B2C devices 300 in cluster sites 8 100 / 50 10,000/ 2,000 10 MVAr
10 11 12 13 14
2 2 2 2 2
KPI.D2.1 KPI.D2.2 KPI.D2.3 KPI.D2.4 KPI.D2.5
Units aggregated Technologies incorporated Available active capacity Energy delivered Available reactive capacity
Number of units integrated into VPP Number of different technologies in VPP portfolio Active capacity made available by VPP in Spot Market and for Ancillary Services respectively Actual energy delivered by VPP in Spot Market and for Ancillary Services respectively Reactive capacity made available by VPP to grid operator
10 total 4 15/ 7.5 150 / 30 0
# #
MW MWh MWAr
DEMO
Code
KPI
Description
Initial Value C1: open state C2: closed state C3: peak fault reduction C4: fault current interruption delay Number and complexity of basic topologies Number of technologies and converters Number of geographical areas Installed capacity
Target Values
Target value (1 1 1.2 1)
Units
15
KPI.D3.1
DC breaker prototype performance HVDC grid cases Control and protection design / HVDC technology Off-shore wind integration in the economic analysis Power transmission through the HVDC grid under contingency conditions
(0 0 1 x) 1 structure + 2 nodes (PTPC) None 1 2
16 17
3 3 3
KPI.D3.2 KPI.D3.3 KPI.D3.4
3 structure + >4 nodes 2+2 3 40
# # # GW
18
19
KPI.D3.5
% of the power transmitted in normal conditions
0% (for a PTPC)
>0% by steps of 10 %
DEMO
Code
KPI
Maximum power forecast error on wind farm level
Description
Initial Value The power forecast error is defined as the difference between the forecasted and produced power. The power is obtained from the forecasted and measured wind speeds, using the wind turbine power curve. The wind turbine manufacturer will improve the control to enable a more flexible operation during storm passages, i.e. operation also above 25 m/s, possibly at a reduced power. The new flexibility will be tested and certified on a wind turbine on land before it is implemented in all Horns Rev 2 wind turbines. This new flexibility should ensure a reliability of maximum 1 sudden shutdown per 200 year of operating time in Denmark, measured in February 2013.
Target Values
Target value
Units
20
KPI.D4.1
1 p.u.
0.2 p.u.
p.u.
21
KPI.D4.2
Improved wind turbine flexibility
2 turbines
All turbines at Horns Rev 2 (Available for all Siemens Variable Speed turbines)
ix
Project Objectives & KPI Year 1

To indicate the performance of Horns Rev 2 wind farm during a storm the amount of imbalance will be used. The imbalance will be defined as the difference between the scheduled wind power, which is handed in half an hour before the operational hour, and the actual measured production The KPI for operating the HVDC interconnection is measured through the time response of balance power supplied as a cause of storm event through the HVDC connection Base case will be established and the imbalance will be calculated. In addition there will be an evaluation of how the improvement should be calculated. To determine which coordinated control system between the HVDC and hydro power plant is most suitable for the demo
Year 2
The imbalance will be reduced by 15%
Year 3
The 15% improvement shall be well documented, thereby enabling a better up scaling of the results.
22
KPI.D4.3
Management strategies for a storm
23
KPI.D4.4
Operating the HVDC interconnection with respect to real-time balancing
The time response to supply regulating power through the HVDC line is expected to be tHVDC_storm<900s (<15 minutes). The time response to supply regulating power by the hydro power station as a cause of storm incident is expected to be: thydro_storm<900s (<15 minutes)
The time response to supply regulating power through the HVDC line is then expected to be optimized
seconds
24
KPI.D4.5
Hydro power control strategies
The KPI for operating the hydro power is measured through the time response of balance power supplied as a cause of storm event.
To determine which coordinated control system between the HVDC and hydro power plant is most suitable for the demo
The time response to supply regulating power by the hydro power station as a cause of storm event is expected to be optimized
seconds
DEMO
Code
KPI.D5.DLR.1 KPI.D5.DLR.2 KPI.D5.DLR.3 KPI.D5.Smar tPFC.1 KPI.D5.Smar tPFC.2 KPI.D5.Smar tPFC.3 KPI.D5.Smar tPFC.4 KPI.D5.WAM S.1 KPI.D5.WMA S.2 KPI.D5.NETF LEX.1 KPI.D5.NETF LEX.2 KPI.D5.NETF LEX.3
KPI
Ampacity Ratios Increase on wind power installation Accuracy of the ampacity forecast Additional transverse power flow Manageable uncertainty Number of manoeuvres Stability of the settings Damping factor Robustness of GOPs Increase of wind integration Gain from DLR Gain from PFC
Description
(Distribution of the) ratios between seasonal ampacity and measured ampacity the ratio of wind power that could be installed on site with or without DLR information (distribution of the) error between the measured ampacity and forecasted ampacity (distribution of the) ratio between the additional transverse power flow through the system considering controllable devices and the transverse flow without (distribution of the) ratio between the positive and negative deviations and the wind uncertainty distribution of the change in settings distribution of the ratio between the change in positive and negative deviations and the wind uncertainty (distribution of the) damping factor of the dominant modes Robustness of GOPs distribution of the current capability in accommodating additional wind generation distribution of the gain from DLRs distribution of the gain from Smart-PFC
Target Values
Mu=20% P(<sa) < 0.05 30.00% Mu=5% P(>10%) < 0.05 Mu = 25.00% Mu=120% -3< x <3 Mu = 20% Sigma = 5.00% < 3/y Mu = 0% Mu = 5% Mu = 5%
Units
25 26 27
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
% % MW
28
29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
% # taps % % Frequencyof revision % % %
Project Objectives & KPI KPI.D5.NETF LEX.4 KPI.D5.NETF LEX.4
37 38
5 5
Loss from GOPs Combined Gain
distribution of the loss from GOPs distribution of the combined gain of the technologies
Mu = -2% Mu = 10%
% %
DEMO
Code
KPI.D6.1
KPI
Correlation between RTTR and Wind Generation
Description
KPI.D6.1will be 1 if a significant and usable correlation between the Real Time Thermal Rating of one or several transmission lines properly chosen and Wind Generation level in the area is found. If a good enough correlation is found, a new concept that could be called Statistical RTTR (SRTTR) will be defined and used in the project. KPI.D6.1will be 0 if the correlation between the above mentioned variables is not significant enough Hourly Values For each monitored line, KPI2 at hour h is defined as: KPI.D6.2.1h=C1C2 (MVA) KPI.D6.2.2h = (C1 C2) / C2 (%) Where C1 is the line capacity at hour h using RTTR or SRTTR and C2 is the seasonal line rating. Yearly Value For each monitored line, the yearly value of KPI2 is defined as the addition of KPI2h for all hours h of the year with positive gain divided by 8760 hours (average gain) KPI.D6.2Y = KPI.D6.2.2h / 8760 (for all h with KPI.D6.2.2h) > 0 For each monitored line, the error in the forecast of the line capacity at hour h is: Error h = (CA CB) / CB (%) Where CA is the line capacity at time t forecasted 2 hours ahead (2HATR) and CB is the line rating (or line capacity) at time t evaluated in real time (RTTR). KPI.D6.3 is defined as the standard deviation of all the errors obtained in one year. Capacity Gain due to the use of the Device: energy evacuation capacity (in MW or in %) KPI.D6.4h. Hourly values A- With the Device installed: The result will be denominated Cwi B- Without the Device: The result will be denominated Cwo The calculation of Cwi and Cwo will be done always using the same criteria, which will correspond to the n and n-1 security criteria KPI.D6.4 is defined as: KPI.D6.4.1h = Cwi Cwo (MW); KPI.D6.4.2h = (Cwi Cwo) / Cwo (%) KPI.D6.4Y. Yearly value: The yearly value of this KPI is defined as the addition of KPI.D6.4.2h for all hours h of the year or it can be estimated using a reduced number of hourly values and appropriate weight: KPI.D6.4Y = KPI.D6.4.2h / 8760
Target Values
KPI.D6.1 = 1
Units
39
40
KPI.D6.2Y
Line Capacity Gain obtained by using RTTR or SRTTR (MVA or %)
KPI.D6.2Y >= 115%
41
KPI.D6.3
Errors in the forecast of the Thermal Rating
KPI.D6.3 <= 35%
42
KPI.D6.4Y
Capacity Gain due to the use of the Device
KPI.D6.4Y >= 110%
43 44
6 6
KPI.D6.5.1 KPI.D6.5.2
Cost of the re-dispatch of conventional generation Number of realized switching operations
45
KPI.D6.5.3
Renewable generation curtailed
If in one particular system state there is a need to increase the energy evacuation capacity from one zone of the grid but the Device is not available, has not been installed in a location that would allow increasing that capacity, the System Operator will use some of the following alternative solutions: 1.-Re-dispatch of the conventional generation 2.-Topological changes 3.-Renewable production curtailment Then, three KPIs are defined for each of these alternative measures: - KPI.D6.5.1 = Cost of the re-dispatch of conventional generation () - KPI.D6.5.2 = Number of realized switching operations (n) - KPI.D6.5.3 = MWh of renewable generation curtailed (MWh) Despite this KPIs are not directly related with the demo performance they will provide an essential input for WP 15 and 16 subsequent assessments so they have been kept but assuming that no target values can be ex ante considered. KPI.D6.5Y. Annual values: The yearly values of the indicators KPI.D6.5.1, KPI.D6.5.2 y KPI.D6.5.3 are obtained respectively by the addition of their 8760 hourly values of the year. Alternatively, they can be estimated using a reduced number of values of the hourly values and appropriate weights
MWh
xi
Project Objectives & KPI Target Value

KPI6 is the annual cost of the Device. The total cost of the installation will be estimated and it will be annualised using appropriate accounting techniques. The O&M costs will be added. Besides the operational alternative solutions, there will be alternative planning solutions, potentially more efficient in the long run. The annual cost of the potential planning alternative solutions that might exist (for example the repowering of a transmission line or the construction of a new one) will be evaluated and the profitability of the proposed system will then be estimated by comparing both costs although it has to be taken into account that being very different solutions, a complete comparison cannot be made in terms of costs only.
46
KPI.D6.6
Cost and profitability
30% of Cost Reduction
WP
Code
KPI.WP17.1
KPI
Improvements in future interconnector projects efficiency Improvements in future interconnector projectseffectiveness
Description
Interconnector projects applying improved measures (best practices) would have got a 20% reduction of costs and time of licensing Improvements (best practices) are targeting 30% of the typical measures (number of permits and consents by competent authorities) for new licensing offshore interconnectors.
Target Values
20% of reduction in cost and time
Units
47
17
48
17
KPI.WP17.2
30% of measures
xii
Table 2 TASKFORCE LEVEL

Nr TF
Code
KPI.15.TF1.1 KPI.15.TF1.2 KPI.15.TF1.3 KPI.15.TF1.4 KPI.15.TF1.5 KPI.15.TF1.6
KPI / Description
Cost savings in the Spanish system where wind power generators are able to control their active power and to provide frequency control: [Euro/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2013 and prospective analysis for future scenarios up to 2020. Additional economic benefit, compared with the default case, for a wind power producer participating in the Spanish secondary reserve market: [Euro/year/Installed MW] Energy losses avoided thanks to the voltage control in wind farms (and clusters): [GWh/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2013 and prospective analysis for future scenarios up to 2020. Economic value of the losses avoided thanks to the voltage control in wind farms (and clusters): [Euro/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2013 and prospective analysis for future scenarios up to 2020. CO2 emissions avoided in the Spanish system with respect the default case due to the new services provided by wind power generators: [tonne CO2/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2013 and prospective analysis for future scenarios up to 2020 Additional wind energy that could be generated in the Spanish system thanks to the new capabilities tested in Demo 1. [GWh/year] Marginal (operating) costs for providing and utilizing the services, as defined in the Demo 2 DERINT KPIs, from the VPP within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario in Denmark Existing approaches for providing the services, as defined in the Demo 2 DERINT KPIs, in Denmark / What are the marginal (operating) costs within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario for providing these services? For each existing approach the following measurements/calculations will be made Marginal (operating) cost benefit of the VPP when providing the services within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario in comparison with the existing approaches in Denmark This will be measured in [] and [tons of CO2 ] reduction/increase for each of the services provided.
Units
49
1 1 1 1 1 1
EUR/year EUR/year/ Installed MW GWh/year EUR/year tonne CO2/year GWh/year [EUR]/ [MW], [MWh], [MVA], [MVAr], [tonne] range [EUR]/ [MW], [MWh], [MVA], [MVAr], [tonne] range [EUR] and [tons of CO2]
50 51 52
53
54
55
KPI.15.TF1.7
56
KPI.15.TF1.8
57
KPI.15.TF1.9
xiii

Cost savings in the German system where wind power generators are able to control their active power and to provide frequency control: [Euro/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2011 and future scenarios. Quantified estimation of the impact on the power systems where wind power generators are able to control their active power and to provide frequency control: - [MW] applicable reserve allocation on wind generation over the France-Benelux-Germany area, - [Euro/year] cost reduction in France for future scenarios up to 2020 Cost savings in the German system thanks to the voltage control in wind farms (and clusters): [/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2011 and for future scenarios Marginal (operating) costs for providing and utilizing the services, as defined in the Demo 2 DERINT KPIs, from the VPP within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario in Germany Existing approaches for providing the services, as defined in the Demo 2 DERINT KPIs, in Germany / What are the marginal (operating) costs within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario for providing these services? For each existing approach the following measurements/calculations will be made Marginal (operating) cost benefit of the VPP when providing the services within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario in comparison with the existing approaches in Germany. This will be measured in [] and [tons of CO2 ] reduction/increase for each of the services provided. Economic impact of a applying the VPP concept [Euro/year] in 2011 and for future scenarios. CO2 emissions avoided in the German system due to the new services provided by wind power generators and virtual power plants: [tonne CO2/year] for installed capacity in 2011 and for future scenarios
58
KPI.16.TF1.1
EUR/year [MW], [EUR/year] EUR/year [EUR]/ [MW], [MWh], [MVA], [MVAr], [tonne] range [EUR]/ [MW], [MWh], [MVA], [MVAr], [tonne] range [EUR] and [tonnes of CO2 ] EUR/year
59
KPI.16.TF1.2
60
KPI.16.TF1.3
61
KPI.16.TF1.4
62
KPI.16.TF1.5
63 64 65 Nr 66 67 68
1 1 1
TF
KPI.16.TF1.6: KPI.16.TF1.7 KPI.16.TF1.8
Code
KPI.15.TF2.1 KPI.15.TF2.2 KPI.15.TF2.3
KPI / Description
Amount of offshore renewable energy that could be securely transmitted by the new HVDC network Ratio between the expected benefit to the system for integrating this energy from of offshore renewable power in the system, and the expected incurred cost to deploy the new components. CO2 emissions that could be avoided in Europe 2020 due to this offshore renewable power.
Units
2 2 2
GWh/year EUR / EUR tonne CO2/year
xiv

Reduced reserve requirement to operate the Danish 2020 and 2030 power system securely in storm situations [MW. This will be calculated as the difference between the expected requirements with and without the actions demonstrated in Demo 4 Reduction in worst case forecast errors in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 with new storm control compared to old storm control [MW]. Reduction in the need for spinning reserves in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 with new storm control compared to old storm control [MW * hours/year]. Increased wind power production with the new storm control compared to the old storm control. Potential for increased hydro power generation capacity in the Nordic synchronous system by 2020 and 2030[MW]. Economic benefit in the European power system by 2020, utilizing the potential contribution of added HVDC connections and added Nordic hydro capacity, to the large-scale integration of wind power in northern Europe [Euro/year] Reduction in the needed transmission capacity if an offshore grid combines wind farm grid connections with area interconnectors, under the condition of optimal use of Nordic hydro [kmMW] Potential alpine hydro capacity with 2020 time horizon [MW]. Economic benefit in the European power system by 2020 utilising the potential contribution of the European grid and alpine hydro capacity to the large-scale integration of wind power in northern Europe [Euro/year] (T16.2.2). CO2 emission benefit in the European power system by 2020 utilising the potential contribution of the European grid and alpine hydro capacity to the large-scale integration of wind power in northern Europe [tonnes CO2/year] (T16.2.2). Reduction in operational costs in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 assuming new storm control and recommended grid reinforcement to utilise hydro in Nordic system and the Alps, compared to old storm control and only already planned grid development [Euro/year] Reduction in CO2 emissions in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 assuming new storm control and recommended grid reinforcements to utilise hydro in Nordic system and the Alps, compared to old storm control and only already planned grid development [tonne CO2/year]. MW EUR/year kmMW MW EUR/year tonnes CO2/year MW MWxhours/year
69
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
KPI.15.TF2.4 KPI.16.TF2.1 KPI.16.TF2.2 KPI.16.TF2.3 KPI.16.TF2.4 KPI.16.TF2.5 KPI.16.TF2.6 KPI.16.TF2.7 KPI.16.TF2.8 KPI.16.TF2.9
70 71 72 73
74
75 76 77
78
79
KPI.16.TF2.10
EUR/year
80
KPI.16.TF2.11
tonnes CO2/year
xv
Nr 81 82 83 84 85 86 87
TF
Code
KPI.15.TF3.1 KPI.15.TF3.2 KPI.15.TF3.3 KPI.15.TF3.4 KPI.15.TF3.5 KPI.15.TF3.6 KPI.15.TF3.7
KPI / Description
Gain in transfer capacities (between the countries in the Central Western Europe area) with network flexibility with respect to the reference case [%/border] and [MW/border] Expected increase in net transfer capacities (between the countries in the Central Western Europe area) with network flexibility with respect to the reference case [%/border] and [MW/border] Extra amount of wind generation that network operation flexibility allows to be transmitted [GWh/year] and reduction of wind curtailment [%] with respect the default case. Economic value (benefits minus costs) at a central European level of increasing the network operation flexibility, Impact on the market shares of the conventional generation technologies in the central European countries [GWh/year/(technology & country)], and in the cross-border interchanges CO2 emissions that could be avoided at a central European level in 2020 due to this network operation flexibility. Potential wind power integration increase in the Spanish system obtained by identifying the latent capacity of the network using Real Time Thermal Rating (RTTR), and by operating the line at maximum capacity by means of Overload Line Controllers (OLC) Economic impact (benefits and costs) of scaling-up the RTTR and the OLC in the Spanish power system (the deferral of network investment and lines re-powering, renewable generation increase as the system can accommodate larger amounts of wind power, etc.), Potential reduction in operational costs at the European level of increasing the network operation flexibility by applying demo 5 and demo 6 technologies to optimise the capacity of the existing transmission system [Euro/year] Investment costs at the European level of increasing the network operation flexibility by applying demo 5 and demo 6 technologies to optimise the capacity of the existing transmission system Potential reduction of CO2 emission at the European level of increasing the network operation flexibility by applying demo 5 and demo 6 technologies to optimise the capacity of the existing transmission system
Units
3 3 3 3 3 3 3
[%/border] and [MW/border] [%/border] & [MW/border] GWh/year] and [%] EUR/year GWh/year/ border tonne CO2/year GWh/year
88
3 3 3 3
KPI.15.TF3.8 KPI.16.TF3.1 KPI.16.TF3.2 KPI.16.TF3.3
EUR/year EUR/year EUR tonnes CO2/year
89 90 91
xvi
Table 3 PROJECT LEVEL

Nr 92 93 94 95
Code
KPI.16.P1 KPI.16.P2 KPI.16.P3 KPI.16.P4
KPI / Description
Potential reduction in operational costs in the European power system by 2020 utilising the solutions demonstrated in TWENTIES Potential reduction in investment costs in the European power system by 2020 utilising the solutions demonstrated in TWENTIES Potential reduction of CO2 in the European power system by 2020 utilising the solutions demonstrated in TWENTIES Reduction in incremental cost of wind power by using all the techniques demonstrated in TWENTIES
Units
EUR/year EUR/year tonnes CO2/year EUR / MW
xvii
Table of Contents
1 2 Introduction Project Objectives 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 3 3.1 3.2 4 4.1 4.2 Annex 1. Annex 2. Annex 3. DEMO #1 System services provided by wind farms (SYSERWIND) DEMO #2 Large scale VPP integration (DERINT) DEMO #3 Technical specifications towards offshore HVDC networks (DC GRID) 1 2 3 16 22
DEMO #4 Offshore wind farm management under stormy conditions (STORM MANAGEMENT) 28 DEMO #5 Network enhanced flexibility (NETFLEX) DEMO #6 Improving the flexibility of the transmission grid (FLEXGRID) WP #17 Offshore barriers KPIs for economic impact assessment KPIs for EU wide integrating assessment Economic impacts of the demonstrations, barriers towards scaling up and solutions EU wide integrating assessment of demonstration replication potential Detailed work plan per Demo List of Acronyms SPANISH SECONDARY FREQUENCY CONTROL SYSTEM (RCP) 38 44 55 57 57 59 65 65 77 83 92 93
Project KPIs
Tools and methodologies for impact assessment
xviii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Profile of active power test in Demo 1 SYSERWIND ............................................................. 8 Figure 2: Profile of dynamic RCP set point signal demanded by TSO in Demo 1 SYSERWIND .......... 9 Figure 3: Cluster voltage control profile in Demo 1 SYSERWIND ....................................................... 12 Figure 4: Business processes of VPP in Demo 2 DERINT .................................................................. 17 Figure 5: Overview of the Danish transmission grid ............................................................................ 29 Figure 6: Imbalance calculation in Demo 4 STORM MANAGEMENT ................................................. 33 Figure 7: Increase in margin calculation in Demo 5 NETFLEX ............................................................ 43 Figure 8: Structure scheme of Demo 6 FLEXGRID ............................................................................. 44 Figure 9: Basic scheme of OLC in Demo 6 FLEXGRID ....................................................................... 46 Figure 10: Selected location for OLC in Demo 6 FLEXGRID Geographical location ........................ 47 Figure 11: Selected location for OLC in Demo 6 FLEXGRID Grid scheme ...................................... 48 Figure 12: Link between WP16 subtasks and the 6 demonstrations and 3 task forces ....................... 60 Figure 13: Matrix of scenarios for supplying grid services today and in the future .............................. 68
xix
INTRODUCTION
The Deliverable Project Objectives & KPIs contains the criteria, in terms of specific objectives and key performance indicators, and methodologies to be used for an objective assessment of the project results. The document is result of the work carried out within the frame of tasks 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 of WP #2 Specifications and requirements for the demonstrations. In brief the goals of these tasks are: To identify any barriers to be overcome by implementing the project results at European level. To define the KPI as well as the target values at Demo, Task Force and Project level. To identify the tools and/or methodologies to be used for the KPI assessment. To detail the Demonstrations work plan, for an optimal achievement of the project results in terms of quality of results, time, and resources. The document is basically structured in accordance with these four main goals; however for a better understanding of the close connection existing between the specific objectives and barriers to be overcome by each demonstration and the proposed KPIs for the assessment of the Demos results; Chapter 2 presents jointly with the specific objectives the KPIs defined at Demo level. Chapter 3 describes the KPIs defined at task force level and at Project level in order to measure the effectiveness of the obtained results after the deployment phase both at national and at European level, as well as the synergies coming from the combination of different outcomes of the demonstrations. In Chapter 4 the tools and the methodology that will be applied to achieve the projects results and impact assessment are identified in outline. Having in mind the final results of the demonstrations are going to be obtained on dates very close to the end of the project, the assessment process should be able to start with preliminary results and being updated in a very efficient way once the demonstrations final results were available. Finally, in separate Annexes, it is included the detailed demonstrations work plan and other complementary information for a better understanding and easy monitoring of the project development. The main value of this report is the set up a transparent framework for the project results assessment by the definition of methodologies, KPIs and target values some years in advance and completely decoupled from the preliminary results obtained during the project. In this way the objectiveness of the impact assessment of project results to be carried out in the final stages of each demonstration is guaranteed and also within the WP #15 Economic impacts of the demonstrations, barriers towards scaling up and solutions, and WP #16 EU wide integrating assessment of demonstration replication potential.
www.twenties-project.eu
Page 1 of 102
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The final project objectives are to demonstrate the effectiveness of novel power engineering technologies, already available from European manufacturers, for removing some specific barriers which prevent on one hand the electric system from welcoming more wind electricity, and on the other side the wind farms from contributing more to the power system reliability; and to quantify the impacts and benefits resulting from the wide implementation of these new technologies in a coordinated way within the existing assets, for the interconnected pan European transmission system. The above overarching goals are split into a set of six high level demonstration objectives, two replication objectives and one dissemination objective. to show that active and reactive power control can be performed reliably with the help of aggregated wind farms, thus allowing secondary frequency control and voltage/reactive control in the system. to show on a large scale that aggregating wind production with flexible loads within appropriate regulatory schemes lead to a more secure and efficient electricity system having high scalability potential. to provide the critical building blocks of DC grid control / protection strategies and DC breakers based on full scale demonstrations which will allow guaranteeing the security of future HVDC multi terminal grids. to demonstrate that adequate coordination mechanisms between offshore wind farms management and available hydro power capacity in neighbouring systems interconnected through existing (HVDC link) facilities brings viable solutions to securely control the power balance during offshore storm passages. to demonstrate that adequate coordination mechanisms between Dynamic Line Rating, Power Flow Controlling Devices and Wide Area Monitoring Systems (WAMS) bring more flexibility to the electric system within affordable capital and operational costs. to demonstrate that alternative operation parameters provided by Dynamic Line Rating and FACTS technology applied on a regional basis, do bring flexibility, do enhance security and do expand the capability of the network to evacuate more wind power. to assess the impact, barriers and solutions needed to upscale the demonstration results. to assess the benefits of replicating the obtained results throughout the entire pan European interconnected transmission system. to disseminate the obtained results widely enough for an early take-up of scaling and replication rules by the stakeholders Due to the outstanding relevance of future off-shore grid development an specific WP is devoted to identifying barriers to obtaining licenses for transnational high voltage submarine cables, and to some extent wind parks, and to draft proposals for reducing these barriers. In the following pages the objectives and barriers to overcome by demonstration are developed, as well as the critical success factors of the tests, and the corresponding key performance indicators (KPIs).
Page 2 of 102
2.1 DEMO #1 SYSTEM SERVICES PROVIDED BY WIND FARMS (SYSERWIND)

2.1.1.- Objectives, impacts & barriers So far, two main issues have been identified in the market as key bottlenecks of wind farms grid integration regarding the services to be provided to the system: the voltage control (reactive power compensation) and the active power balancing (in terms of short-term reserves needed in the system to cover deviations of power production, i.e., secondary frequency control). The full scale demonstration aims to prove the benefits of novel software and control technologies coupled with an innovative system management approach. The contribution of wind energy to the system will show how aggregated wind farms can provide system services (voltage and frequency control) in Spain. This demo aims to show that active and reactive power control can be performed reliably with the help of aggregated wind farms, thus allowing secondary frequency control and voltage/reactive control in the system. The demonstration will be split into two main parts: Active power control, with the objective to perform secondary frequency control for the system. Reactive power control, with the objective to provide voltage control in a wide-area of the grid.
In the active power control, what it is going to be carried out in TWENTIES is the incorporation of wind farms into frequency control mechanisms to provide downward and upward secondary frequency control in similar conditions to conventional generation. In relation to the reactive power, three aggregations of wind farms are going to be controlled in a coordinated way; this is, three clusters acting to fulfil higher level requests (at Cluster level). In this scenario the interactions among Clusters should be considered in depth to optimize the reactive power management, allowing a voltage profile control in a wide-area of the grid. For both parts of the demonstration, the wind forecast tools will be modified to provide a shorter term prediction and to choose a period of time with medium-high production in order to get proper values for evaluating statically and dynamically the results. These tools will be a key issue for both active and reactive power control, as the accuracy of the available reactive and active power calculation is a key point for the improvements. Two main issues will be addressed respectively: How to set the operating point of a single wind farm in order to be able to increase or to decrease the total active power output of an aggregation of wind farms, while providing secondary frequency control, and considering the technical and economical performance of the wind farms as well. How to set the operating point of a single wind farm in order to be able to control the reactive power provided/consumed for an aggregation of wind farms (and therefore the voltage at the connection point of the aggregation of wind farms), according to the voltage control algorithms of the TSO at EMS level, and also considering the technical and economical performance in the control algorithms of the wind farms. www.twenties-project.eu Page 3 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI At this point it is relevant to highlight that although the experience acquired in the Wind on the Grid project is highly valuable for enhancing the reactive power control of the aggregation of wind farms, in TWENTIES Project it is intended to provide a highly improved voltage control demonstration compared to the Wind on the Grid one. In this way, the TWENTIES demo consists on three aggregations of wind farms voltage regulators (instead of one), fully coordinated with the short term voltage planning tools of the TSO dispatch centre. Thus, although the experience learnt from Wind on the Grid is very valuable, this voltage control demonstration, previously described, would be pretty outstanding compared with Wind on the Grid one. The expectations rely on the enhanced control algorithms, the improvements in the wind forecast tools to report the reactive power compensation capability to the TSO, the wind energy voltage control fully integrated in the short term voltage control tools of the TSO, and the wide-area effects due to the amount of MVAr put in place in the demo in different locations. Therefore, it could be said that this voltage demonstration is a step beyond the Wind on the Grid one. Moreover, the latter did not include a frequency control demonstration as in this case, making the present project more challenging in terms of wind power integration in the grid. The expected impacts of this demonstration for the pan European transmission system are: An increase of transmission system security and stability due to the ancillary services that can be provided by wind energy already in operation. A further increase of wind power generation during low demand hours or under high penetration conditions, thanks to higher system controllability. Full escalation of the proposed improvements to any other EU country. Reduced power system losses due to optimally distributed reactive compensation and wide-area voltage control. Reduced active power reserves in the system, using CO2-free sources since wind farms will be able to provide frequency control. Technical and economical data for the costs and benefits analysis of providing these new services from wind energy facilities.
Active Power Control test The main challenge for the implementation of an active power control is to set the operating point of a wind farm in such a way that the aggregation of wind farms has the capability to decrease or increase the active power injected to the system when secondary frequency control is requested; minimising potential losses of wind power while keeping the energy reserve. The request is sent by the TSO through its secondary control system called RCP1, requiring the wind farm operators to allocate the set-points among wind farms taking part in the aggregation within a group of aggregated wind farms named as a wind farm cluster. A zone controller (AGC) will be incorporated into the Iberdrola Renovables energy control centre (CORE) to receive the TSO control requirements which will then be allocated among the aggregated wind farms. The active power control regulators of the wind farms and its aggregation will be enhanced with new capabilities not available from the current state of the art, by considering both technical and economical data for dividing the set points between the wind farms and each turbine. This part of the demonstration will validate that the control of the active power supplied by a large aggregation of wind farms (independently of the connection point and location of the wind farms)
1
See details in Annex II
Page 4 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI allows the active power to be ramped up or down, which turns out to be a secondary frequency control as demanded by a TSO/DSO/EMS system.
Reactive Power Control Demo The reactive power compensation can be provided by aggregated wind farms (cluster), which are integrated in the EMS system of the TSO, to stabilize or control the voltage of part of a transmission network (400 or 220 kV) will be demonstrated. The aggregated wind farms will be considered like any conventional power plant for the voltage regulation purposes, within the technical limits of the tested turbines for providing reactive power. As for Active power control test, regulators will be enhanced with new capabilities not available at the current state of the art. For this reason, the requested set point from the TSO for each aggregation of wind farms might be sent as a voltage reference value (kV request) or as a reactive compensation (MVAr or cos request). The reference would be sent to the Iberdrola Renovables CORE dispatch centre in order to distribute the set-points to the different wind farms in each aggregation. In addition, the dynamic response will be evaluated and compared to the standard ENTSO-E requirements, and the different control strategies at system level (voltage, reactive power or power factor control) will be assessed. The demonstration then will show how existing and future wind farms can participate, in real time, in voltage control of the transmission network by controlling the voltage profile of the grid, in order to relief congestions or voltage collapses, and to provide voltage stability services.
Expected Impact The SYSERWIND demo scope within WP3 and WP9 is up to provide the needed input-data of the demo results and measurements required to scale them up at a national level, and address the following expected impacts: Impact on wind turbine performance The aim is to figure out the effects on the turbines components in terms of mechanical stresses, electrical losses, life of components, quality of energy, capability of response to any variation of the system, and any other that may affect the performance and reliability of this asset. Impact on wind farm components and performance The demo will make it possible to identify and validate the effects on the wind farm, in terms of loss of profit, CAPEX and OPEX, electrical infrastructure losses, life of components and any other issues that could affect the performance and reliability of the assets. It will consider the technical and economical strategy to distribute within the individual wind farm the set points received for the aggregation of wind farms. Especially relevant for the Voltage control part of the Demo is the impact of the new operation functionality on the on-load tap changer of the power transformers at the substations.
Page 5 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Impact of the wind farms operation in Clusters The impact of the performance of the clusters in the TSO Grid will be assessed by monitoring just one single point. Aggregations of wind farms will be controlled in a coordinated way: to carry out frequency control mechanisms to provide downward and upward secondary reserve in similar conditions to conventional generation, giving evidence of the performance capabilities of the cluster to act like the latter. to demonstrate that reactive power regulation can be achieved at cluster level. Impact on the grid Three clusters acting to fulfil higher level requests, like a voltage profile set point, will be assessed to value the capacity to act as a conventional generation point. Thus, this is to consider cluster nodes as PV nodes instead of PQ nodes in the load flow planning. Economic Impact The economic impact assessment of the active power control demo will be performed within the Spanish market, under two different perspectives: From the perspective of a wind power producer that, as market participant, needs to assess whether installing the new controllers is economically profitable of not. This assessment requires quantifying the expected loss of the wind generation that is spilled in order to keep upward reserve, plus the additional incomes for selling this ancillary service to the TSO. This assessment should take into account the possible effect on prices (both energy and reserve) due to the participation of wind producers in the reserve market.
From the perspective of the whole power system, trying to capture not only the impact at the end of the project (2013), but also during the posterior years up to 2020. Additionally, the possibility of wind farms to provide voltage control can result in the reduction of active power losses within the distribution network that connect wind parks to the transmission grid.
Barriers to Overcome This demo is focused on demonstrate the capabilities of wind energy to provide frequency control and to provide large scale voltage control, in both cases through aggregation of wind farms. Although the regulatory approach for such services is different in several countries, the technical feasibility for providing the system services is completely replicable in other countries, by adapting the static and dynamic capability within the local context of the market and the grid, for the existing or nearly expected wind energy in the country. In fact, almost all the new developments of grid codes within the EU include some requirements aimed at asking the wind farms to participate in the voltage and frequency regulations, as this is a common need for all TSOs. Some barriers are technological, which will imply that some R&D gaps must be solved in the project for each of the demonstrations. It will be necessary to implement new tools at turbine and wind farm level. It might even mean modifying the existing software of the PLC of the turbines (what will be avoided as much possible) and the algorithms of the local SCADA system of each wind farm. Likewise, the installation of new hardware in the local SCADA system of each wind farm participating in the demo will be considered. The new regulation algorithms could also impose new requirements to the communication between the wind farm and the control centre that could require modifications. In www.twenties-project.eu Page 6 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI this sense, new control algorithms for the aggregation of wind farms will be developed, therefore making it necessary to implement new facilities at CORE dispatch centre level (the communication infrastructure between dispatch centres, for exchanging real time information and set points, may become compulsory). The energy market itself is a barrier from the point of view of forecasting. Currently, the secondary frequency control is provided through a day ahead market where the participants offer the energy to step up/down for each hour. However, secondary frequency control provided by wind energy requires a short-term forecast in order to precisely calculate the available active power regulation band, especially, the amount of energy to step up; To avoid an excess of wind energy lost while keeping the reserve, the forecast tools should be able to provide the prediction at the very last moment, while the secondary frequency control market only allows hourly offers submitted quite in advance. This new forecasting procedure may end up revealing the need for a new (short-term) market for wind energy, reducing the bidding time-horizon. Short-term forecasts will be necessary in order to precisely calculate the available reactive power, which means being more accurate than current forecast tools. In some other cases, the demonstration could face operational or business barriers, derived from the fact that third parties are connected to the network and might be affected by the project.
2.1.2.- SYSERWIND KPIs Evaluation Methodology In reference to the Active Power Control, different tests will be carried out in order to check the capabilities of the AGC control. The active power produced by the three clusters will be aggregated and curtailed to create an active power regulation band to ramp up and down the production of the clusters. The regulation band will be constant and referred to the total available power. According to the regulation band available hourly, a secondary regulation band will be offered to the market each hour. The main aim of the test is to check the AGC capability to maintain, increase and decrease the power at TSOs request. With regards to the Reactive Power Control, as a first step, the capability of the cluster (aggregation of wind farms) to perform the wide-area control (EMS level) will be assessed through two different tests at cluster level: a reactive power test, and once the former test is passed, a voltage control test. Later on, the cluster capabilities will be included within the wide area voltage control of the TSO in order to control the voltage profile in a wide area of the grid considering the three clusters capabilities. Active Power Control KPIs Test Procedure In order to perform the active power control demo, an accurate forecast will be carried out to predict the available active power during the demo. This prediction will make it possible to create an active power reserve so that a secondary frequency regulation is achieved; maintaining an active power offer during one hour and following the different set points, upwards and downwards, within the dynamic and static response limits. The test procedure will be divided in two different programs:
Page 7 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI 1.- The Active power offered, with the three clusters altogether, is maintained to a defined value. Afterwards, up and down step set points are issued to the regulation zone. The time constant of the regulator has to be less than 100s and the requested set point held during 15 minutes. The profile of the test described above is shown in the following figure.
Figure1:ProfileofactivepowertestinDemo1SYSERWIND
2.- The Active power offered is held and the AGC receives an actual RCP set point signal (new set points every 4 seconds). The system has to be able to comply with the dynamic criteria of the TSO. The profile of the test described above is shown in the next page figure.
Page 8 of 102
Figure2:ProfileofdynamicRCPsetpointsignaldemandedbyTSOinDemo1SYSERWIND
Test Requirements An accurate forecast has to be carried out in order to precisely estimate the reachable power of each wind farm. Available power estimation in real time will be provided also by each wind farm. Combining both elements, an accurate value should be reached. Yet, it has to evaluate the accuracy of the hourly forecast of the current tools to be used in real-time. Thus, it has to clearly check the real-time definition and the forecast deviation in this test. The amplitude of the offered, upwards and downwards, secondary power reserve will be within the 10MW-50MW range, depending on climatic conditions, operational status of the wind farms and the forecast.
Page 9 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI KPIs With the aim to evaluate the performance of the regulator, the following KPIs will be considered:
Critical Success Factor (CSF)
KPI.D1 .1.1
Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Time during the maximum/minimum active power regulation level is maintained Achievement of the dynamic requirements to participate in the Spanish secondary frequency control of the system, assessed every 4 seconds:
KPI target The maximum/minimum active power level is maintained at least 15 minutes AGC regulator dynamic response should be: An equivalent first order system with a 100 seconds time constant minimum (63% of the set point value is achieved in less than that time). The total active power value produced will not be higher (power increase) or lower (power decrease) than the required secondary frequency control power, by each sampling cycle (4 seconds). 90% of the requests received during each hour achieved.
Unit
Active power availability for upwards and downwards secondary power reserve.
Min
KPI.D1 .1.2
Dynamic response of the wind energy AGC regulator.
Constant time of the AGC regulator Active power increase/reduction according the set point requested
MW / seconds
KPI.D1 .1.3
Availability of the offer for upwards and downwards secondary power reserve.
Percentage of achievement of the active power set point requested each 4 seconds
% (MW)
Reactive Power Control KPIs Cluster Control - Reactive Power Control The aim of the cluster regulation is to achieve a requested voltage set-point at a grid node of the TSO network. This means being able to take the needed actions on the different wind farms connected to the cluster. This control has to assure the compliance of the security and quality requirements of the electric supply. The aim of the cluster voltage regulation is to achieve a requested reactive power set-point at a cluster node of the TSO network according to the reactive power capabilities reported by the wind farms belonging to the cluster. Cluster Control - Voltage Control The aim of the cluster voltage regulation is to achieve a requested voltage set-point at a cluster of the TSO network according to the requirements for conventional generation in Spain.
Page 10 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI If the reference is not achievable, the wind farms will be saturated at their maximum inductive/capacitive reactive power value. Wide Area Control - Voltage Control The aim of the area regulation is to achieve a requested voltage profile over a wide area of the TSO network. The TSO will generate and send commands to the cluster regulators taking in to account the global voltage profile and the interaction between the clusters in order to achieve a defined voltage profile. This means being able to take the needed actions over reactive power generation and absorption resources of the three clusters connected in the area in order to maintain a defined voltage profile. If the reference is not achievable, the wind farms connected to the corresponding cluster will be saturated at their maximum inductive/capacitive reactive power value. This control has to guarantee the compliance with the security and quality requirements of the electric supply. Test Procedure Cluster Control - Reactive Power Control Different tests will be carried out in order to check the capabilities of the cluster control. The following scenarios will be considered:
Wind Production 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) Low Low Low Low Mid-range Mid-range Mid-range Mid-range High High High High Voltage in cluster Mid-range Mid-range Low High Mid-range Mid-range Low High Mid-range Mid-range Low High Set point Capacitive Inductive Capacitive max. saturation Inductive max. saturation Capacitive Inductive Capacitive max. saturation Inductive max. saturation Capacitive Inductive Capacitive max. saturation Inductive max. saturation
Page 11 of 102
The regulator will issue orders according to the wind farm regulators in order to achieve the set point within a regulation band. The control has to take into consideration the capacity of reactive power consumption /absorption to calculate the set-points to issue to lower levels. Maximum reactive power generation and absorption capabilities will be shown and reported to the TSO dispatch centre.
Cluster Control - Voltage Control It is proposed that the cluster voltage control will be carried out at Huneja substation cluster. A 400 kV reactor in Litoral substation will be used in order to vary the voltage in the 400 kV grid, by connecting and disconnecting the reactor, and therefore producing a voltage step up (disconnection) and down (connection). The cluster regulator will react to control these voltage steps to regulate the voltage on the cluster connection point, with the aim of maintaining the received set point. As a contingency plan, in case the connection and disconnection of the reactor would not be possible due to grid security and safety reasons, two alternative cluster voltage control tests are foreseen: by means of changing the main 400 kV power transformers tap changer of the cluster, in order to create several steps up and down in the cluster voltage, which has to be compensated by the voltage control of the cluster. by means of sending voltage set-points at Huneja 400 kV from the SO control centre to CORE
Figure3:ClustervoltagecontrolprofileinDemo1SYSERWIND
Page 12 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Wide Area Control - Voltage Control Two different tests will be carried out in order to check the capabilities of the area control. Capacitive profile A higher voltage profile will be requested in order to check the capacitive reactive power capabilities of the wide-area control. The wide-area regulator will issue voltage set-points to the cluster regulators in order to achieve the requested voltage profile in the TSO network within a regulation band. The control has to take into consideration the reactive power generation capacity to calculate the set-points to issue to lower levels. Higher set point will be sent to those clusters with a higher capacity to provide reactive power. Inductive profile A lower voltage profile will be requested in order to check the inductive reactive power capabilities of the wide-area control. The wide-area regulator will issue voltage set-points to the cluster regulators in order to achieve the requested voltage profile in the TSO network within a regulation band. The control has to take into consideration the reactive power consumption capacity to calculate the set-points to issue to lower levels. Higher set point will be sent to those clusters with a higher capacity to consume reactive power. Test Requirements To perform the voltage control two main conditions have to be addressed: All the third-parties wind farm and thermo-solar power plants connected to each cluster have to be set to a power factor equal to one. REE will take into consideration the operational status of the other thirds wind farm and thermo-solar power plants connected to each cluster to assess the impact of the regulation made by Iberdrola Renovables wind farms.
Page 13 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI KPIs Cluster Control - Reactive Power Control With the aim to evaluate the performance of the regulator, the following KPIs will be considered for each scenario tested:
Critical Success Factor (CSF) Key Performance Indicator (KPI) Percentage of produced reactive power samples, during one hour, within a certain band around the maximum and minimum available reactive power reported to the TSO. Regulation band and settling time (ts) of the cluster reactive power regulator since a set point is received. KPI Goal 75 % of the produced reactive power samples, measured during one hour, within 10 % around the reported available reactive power value. Steady-state error within 10 % around the set point value (if achievable) and settling time less than 5 minutes. Unit
KPI.D1.2.1
Accuracy of the available reactive power reported to the TSO dispatch centre.
% (MVAr)
KPI.D1.2.2
Dynamic performance and accuracy of the reactive power regulation according to the requirements for the conventional generation.
% (MVAr)
Cluster Control - Voltage Control With the aim to evaluate the performance of the regulator, the following KPIs will be considered:
Critical Success Factor (CSF) Key Performance Indicator (KPI) KPI Goal 75 % of the voltage samples, measured during one hour, within 2.5 kV around the requested set point. If the set point is not achievable, the reactive power support from the cluster must equal to the saturation value. Unit
KPI.D1.2.3
Accuracy of the voltage set point achievement, or reactive power saturation if the set point is not achievable
Percentage of cluster voltage samples, during one hour, within a certain band around the requested set point value.
KPI.D1.2.4
Dynamic performance of the voltage regulation according to the requirements for the conventional generation
Settling time (ts) of the cluster voltage regulator since a set point is received in the cluster or since the perturbation occurs. The settling time is defined as the time to reach the 5 % band around the set point.
Settling time less than 5 minutes
seconds
Page 14 of 102
Wide Area Control - Voltage Control With the aim to evaluate the performance of the regulator, two KPIs (Key Performance Indicator) will be considered:
Critical Success Factor (CSF)
Key Performance Indicator (KPI)
KPI Goal 75% of the voltage samples during one hour, that the voltage is reached within 2.5 kV around the requested set point. If the set point is not achievable, the reactive power support from the cluster equals to the saturation value.
Unit
KPI.D1.2.5
Accuracy in the requested voltage profile achievement.
Voltages at the buses according to the issued set points, assessed in a one hour period.
KPI.D1.2.6
Dynamic performance of the wide area voltage regulation according to the requirements for the conventional generation.
Settling time (ts) of the voltage network buses since the set point is received by CORE.
Settling time less than 5 minutes.
Minutes
Page 15 of 102
2.2 DEMO #2 LARGE SCALE VPP INTEGRATION (DERINT)

The purpose of Demo 2 DERINT is to show at large scale that aggregating wind production with flexible loads within appropriate regulatory schemes lead to a more secure and efficient electricity system having high scalability potential. In order to show this, Demo 2 DERINT will: Demonstrate that fluctuations from wind can be balanced in DONG Energys central portfolio consisting of large thermal power plants, i.e. Combined Heat and Power Plants (CHP) as well as offshore wind farms. Develop a Virtual Power Plant (VPP) that mobilizes small decentralized production and consumption units and exposes their flexibility towards DONG Energys control room in order to not only provide ancillary services but also to balance DONG Energys central portfolio.
Demo 2 DERINT will progressively and iteratively work towards a commercial viable solution that integrates and balances distributed energy resources and demand response. The purpose of the demo is to create an alternative to deliver ancillary services from the traditional fossil fired power plants. Thus, Demo 2 DERINT not only verifies the viability of the VPP concept but also focuses on upscaling, optimizing methods and bringing ancillary services produced by local units to the market. 2.2.1.- Objectives, impacts & barriers The value propositions to be demonstrated in the Demo 2 DERINT are: More fine-grained ancillary services on a short time basis. Integration in TSO enabling them to expand existing ancillary service requirements on a fine grained level as well as reliability and stability. Peak shaving offerings and new ancillary services based on demand side management offerings for better system balancing and frequency support. Integration in spot and intraday markets. Synergy to DONG Energys central power plants and off-shore portfolio balancing. Other services to other VPP based systems, examples may include electric vehicle systems and micro-CHP clusters. Impact on <1h and >1h wind integration issues. Develop a secure, stable and scalable platform.
Expected Impact The expected impacts of the Demo 2 DERINT are: 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. www.twenties-project.eu Page 16 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI 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 Energys 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. Impact on society 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 Barriers to be overcome The end-to-end business processes to be demonstrated will entail the following barriers to be overcome: The business processes of the VPP solution, illustrated below, can be described in 7 fundamental processes pictured below:
Figure4:BusinessprocessesofVPPinDemo2DERINT
The processes are as follows: 1. Recruiting the customer: DONG Energy Sales and Distribution (S&D) recruits B2B customers to engage in the demonstration. In year 1 the focus is to recruit customers with medium to large size local units (LU) in Denmark. www.twenties-project.eu Page 17 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI 2. Register LU capabilities: DONG Energy makes an assessment of the LU profile. 3. Install and test control equipment in the LU: the control equipment interfaces with the LU and is tested and installed at the customer site. 4. a. Central control room request: DONG Energys central control room receives a signal from the TSO to deliver ancillary services and sends a request to the VPP core to deliver ancillary services. b. On/Off request and feedback: the VPP core sends a signal to its portfolio of available LUs and activates or deactivates a LU. 5. Measure: the LU sends signals to the VPP core of its activation and processes. 6. Data to TSO: the VPP core sends live date of activation or deactivation of LUs to the TSO. 7. Compensate customer (LU owner): finally the LU owner will receive economic compensation for its availability.
Barriers to overcome in relation to the recruitment of customers: Customers may not be willing to participate. If customers cannot measure the economic benefits of connecting their local asset it will make the VPP less attractive Existing DONG Energy processes may not be capable to handle customers. The LU may be placed in an area not suitable for usage during certain hours a day as an example a generator close to a kinder garden cannot be activated in opening hours due to exhaust. The LU may technically not be suitable for connecting to the VPP.
Barriers to overcome in relation to market structure and TSO: 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.
Technology barriers to overcome: Scalability of the IT platform and optimization algorithms. Transform LU capabilities into ancillary services. Providing a standardized solution for LU control.
Barriers to overcome in relation to internationalisation: There exist limits for the replication of the demonstration results in other countries. There may exist barriers in the regulatory setup of the other markets. An example is the Spanish market. According to current Spanish regulation, it is only possible to aggregate a single type of technology. Thus, a VPP experiment in the Spanish system could be carried out
Page 18 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI only virtually and real scheduling entities would have to face deviation penalties corresponding to the periods where the VPP experiment has been carried out. Below is the tentative plan as outlined in the Description of Work for Demo 2 DERINT: Year 1: Off shore control integration into central portfolio optimization Scaling up of existing VPP to a size that can enter the ancillary markets and stay active for the remaining project period Start development of business case models, market screening and replicability in the case of industrial customers, i.e. business-to-business sales (B2B) and private households, i.e. business-to-consumer sales (B2C). Integrate large VPP units, both distributed generation and demand response units, within existing customer base with a B2B focus Integrate 1 or 2 existing clusters of demand response with a B2B focus Aim for 15MW VPP end year one Integrate land wind into VPP and show that the VPP can balance a sub-cluster of assets using distributed generation units to support the wind variations (<15min scale) Internal balances of the off-shore wind production supported by CHP production to meet the production plan closed with the energy markets VPP integration into central power control optimization on low time scales <5min Local VPP balances across clusters of multiple technologies Scaling up the VPP to 50MW and introducing new VPP functionality, examples may include cluster control, dynamic unit aggregation, integration of forecasts. Demand side management services focusing on economic optimization, energy saving and CO2 optimization aligned with customers preferences. New TSO services, examples may include reactive power. New business model processes for VPP metering and billing to deliver ancillary services. Demonstrate IT scalability, security and portability.
Year 2: Year 3:
2.2.2.- DERINT KPIs Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) The five selected KPIs are related directly to Demo 2 DERINT and therefore kept on strictly technical terms. Positive financial effects to customers, energy market players, the power system and the society are the end-goals of the Demo 2 DERINT, and they will be measured as such in the Work Packages 15 and 16. Decided Key Performance Indicators for Demo 2 DERINT:
Page 19 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI 1. Number of aggregated units (measured in #) 2. Number of different technologies incorporated (measured in #) 3. Controllable active power capacity available to the market (measured in MW), minimum 50% delivered and compliant to the Danish ancillary service market. 4. Active power related ancillary services delivered to market (measured in MWh), minimum 20% delivered and compliant to the Danish ancillary service market. 5. Controllable reactive capacity available to the market (measured in MVAr) Next table shows the target value for each year of the different KPIs
Nr Key Performance Indicator 1. Units aggregated 2. Technologies incorporated 3. Available active capacity: Spot Market / Ancillary Services (MW) 4. Energy delivered: Spot Market / Ancillary Services (MWh) 5. Available reactive capacity (MVAr) Year 1 10 total 4 15 / 7,5 MW 150 / 30 MWh 0 MVAr KPIs goals Year 2 40 total 20 B2C 50 in cluster sites 6 50 / 25 MW 1,000 / 200 MWh 3 MVAr Year 3 >100 total (B2B) 2,000 B2C devices 300 in cluster sites 8 100 / 50 MW 10,000 / 2,000 MWh 10 MVAr
KPI.D2.1 KPI.D2.2 KPI.D2.3 KPI.D2.4 KPI.D2.5
Impact assessment methodology The following KPIs will be measured and documented from data extracted directly from the system in operation in the Danish power market: 1. Units 2. Capacity MW 3. Technologies 4. Energy delivered The system will be implemented to work in commercial operation. That includes traceability and history data logging. So the first 4 KPIs will be measureable from the logged historical data available from the systems databases. The KPI no. 5 for reactive power capacity (MVAr) should as far as possible be measurable directly from the system in operation as KPI 1-4, but may possibly be measured only in a laboratory environment. The traditional method to overcome volatility in electricity production has been to optimise power plants for up-and-down readiness (spinning reserve). However, with increasing installation of volatile sources of electricity production such as wind power, alternatives to the power plants readiness is required. The VPP solition offers one such alternative. The expenses of having power plants ready for spinning reserves are high. Enabling existing units in the market to produce and consume when wind production is high or low respectively is a financially more attractive option. One way to assess the
Page 20 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI direct financial benefits of using the VPP, is to measure the difference in cost of the VPP activation price and the price of the alternative that would have been activated if the VPP was not in the market. Where the FENIX project focused on verifying the viability of the VPP concept, the TWENTIES project and Demo 2 DERINT is focussed on scaling this up, optimising the method and bringing ancillary services produced by local units to market. There are therefore no clashes between the KPIs of the two projects.
Page 21 of 102
2.3 DEMO #3 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS TOWARDS OFFSHORE HVDC NETWORKS (DC GRID)
Off-shore wind energy up to now is connected all over Europe to the mainland grid, exclusively via radial or point-to-point connections (PTPC). If this type of connection is the easiest and cheapest one to be built and operated today, it presents several drawbacks from the power system point of view, mainly: the power delivered at the mainland grid is fully dependent on wind conditions at the location of the wind farms and does not benefit from any mitigating effect of wind conditions at other locations, the tripping of the connecting line results in the loss of the total wind generation resulting in loss of money both for the generator and for TSOs that have to compensate the loss of power, the ancillary services provided by the cluster of wind farms may not be optimized from a system point of view, and thus result in limited effects on the global power system operation no coordination among several PTPC injecting to the mainland grid is effective today no additional capacity is offered to the electrical market when the wind conditions are not favourable.
To overcome PTPC limitations for future large amounts of installed wind capacity in offshore wind farms and potentially other marine sources (up to 40 GW for 2020 and 150 GW for 2030 according to EWEA sources), more sophisticated and better adapted topologies for off-shore connections providing advanced operational functions have to be designed, technically studied and proven feasible from the technological point of view by manufacturers, as well as operable under the security requirements of TSOs. Multi-terminal DC (MTDC) solutions as well as grid structures will be investigated from technical, technological and economic points of view in Demo 3. This will be done through conceptualization and assessment for different time layers of the HVDC network in WP5, and technological developments mainly focused on the DC fault characterization and design of the appropriate sequence of detection, selection and fault clearing in WP11. From the AC mainland grid, the HVDC off-shore network transmitting off-shore wind power will be considered as a multi-terminal VPP connected to several on-shore locations either in the same country or in several countries. The characteristics of the injectors to the mainland grid will depend on the topology of the HVDC network, on the wind zones covered by this network, on the characteristics of the generators connected to it, on their regulators, on the control laws of the converters, on the protection system of the HVDC network.
2.3.1.- Objectives, impacts and barriers The main objectives of Demo 3 DC-Grid are the following: Objective 1. Work out the economic criteria for developing HVDC grids Although not existing yet (only PTPC are implemented), it is commonly known that HVDC grids are expected to involve important investments. They should therefore be designed according to a www.twenties-project.eu Page 22 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI complete identification of their multiple drivers, a complete cost benefit analysis, as well as an assessment of their expectable return time on investment for their stakeholders. A comparison with PTPC of wind farms to the European grid will be performed for several scenarios and locations of offshore wind generation on the European shore. An approach based on adapted probabilistic methodologies for power system energy balance and security analysis will be developed, taking into account wind characteristics in different geographic areas, availability of power system devices and operational constraints on the AC mainland grid. Investment costs as well as operational costs will be assessed and compared for different scenarios. An assessment of generation costs, marginal costs, probability of unsupplied energy, expectation of CO2 emissions will be made for several scenarios of a the multi-terminal VPP. Possible structures for target HVDC networks will be discussed within the Consortium on the basis of these economic results. Objective 2. Design and selection of HVDC basic topologies An HVDC target grid, if decided in next decades, will be built on a step by step basis, starting with already existing or decided PTPC. Therefore, further steps to the PTPC have to be designed and selected according to economic and technical criteria to be worked out, from several HVDC topologies and technologies: how to grow from PTPC to three nodes, four nodes and more nodes topologies, in VSC or LCC technologies, with backbone, ring, star or other structures. Each basic topology will be considered as a potential part of a wider target HVDC off-shore network. The feasibility of these topologies will be partly linked to the existence or not of a DC breaker with appropriate technical performances. The DC breaker prototype built and tested in the DEMO will strongly contribute to this objective. Objective 3. - Secure operation of HVDC basic topologies: control and protection schemes, DC node design Each basic topology has to be fully designed and operated securely in normal conditions, but also in faulty situations. This means the global control and protection scheme for each structure has to be designed carefully and checked through detailed simulations. In other words, the traditional DC hub from literature has to be designed in depth from a technical point of view, to make the basic HVDC topology operational, stable and secure. The characterization of DC faults for various locations and technologies is a key point of this topic. Objective 4. Operation of the hybrid HVDC / AC interconnected power system The HVDC off-shore grid will be operated in parallel with the AC mainland grid creating thus a hybrid interconnection not experimented with up to now. The global behaviour of this hybrid power system has therefore to be analysed for various operational conditions, to adjust parameters of control and protection devices both on DC and AC side, design coordinated control if necessary, and keep the system within secure limits for reference disturbances that are to be defined.
Page 23 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Objective 5. Technology for HVDC grids: DC breakers Availability of mechanical or static DC breakers with appropriate performances, both for fault clearing and switching topological actions is not proven yet, although these devices are crucial for developing and operating future HVDC grids with appropriate Power System Protection Plans (PSP). Without breakers, in faulty conditions, the losses of power, especially for large amounts of off-shore wind generation might be damaging for the global security of the interconnected power system, leading to expensive reserves misuse, load-shedding, and possibly severe incidents. In parallel, wind generators would be fully exposed to the uncontrolled risks of being disconnected when a fault affects the HVDC network, unless the affected part can properly and rapidly be isolated, allowing the power to flow on the remaining safe paths. Demo 3 DC-Grid will address this specific aspect in detail. The outcomes are following the objectives as described above. Outcome 1 Economic benefits expected from HVDC grids and risk assessment for the HVDC / AC interconnected power system. Outcome 2 Realistic and operable basic HVDC topologies (at least 3 nodes). Outcome 3 Master control, protection scheme and DC nodes design for each basic topology and their possible variants. Outcome 4 Assessment of the mutual impact of the HVDC off-shore grid and the AC grid. Outcome 5 DC breaker prototype and prospects. The DC breaker prototype will be built by ALSTOM GRID, partner of DCGRID. Expected Impact No way for reaching from the European network point of view, the target of 40 GW offshore wind in 2020 and making it extendable to 150 GW in 2030 has ever been studied from the technical point of view. In parallel to the target amount of wind generation, target scenarios for a feasible HVDC network in 2020, 2030 and beyond will come out from WP5 and WP11. An indicative roadmap for building an off-shore network at European scale with respect of national constraints will be proposed. These needs to pre-define at the European level what are the criteria to define and optimise scenarios for an off-shore target network on the European shore, as a long term goal to be reached, instead of putting together random developments on local initiatives.
Barriers to be overcome No HVDC grid exists today. The only HVDC MTDC in the world, operated as three- legs connections without generators, are those in Northern America and in Southern Europe. The Kriegers Flak project is a first attempt in Northern Europe with connection to generators. Therefore new HVDC interconnection schemes have to be designed and analysed. These HVDC interconnection schemes have to be compatible with available technologies on one side, but also be securely operable by TSOs, contribute to offering additional Page 24 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI capacities to the European electricity market and provide optimised operating conditions to wind producers. Robust control and efficient protection are the crucial barriers to be overcome by TSOs, manufacturers and wind producers together. Another barrier is the European view of the development of such an off shore grid. All initiatives today are local or bilateral. A broader approach would allow for more coordination for wind development and operation in Europe, leading to more efficient investments and a higher security level for the DC / AC hybrid power system.
2.3.2.- DC GRID KPIs KPI1 - DC breaker prototype performance Manufactured by ALSTOM GRID An indicator composed of three aspects relating to the basic states of the breaker (open, closed and operating) is proposed. The KPI is a four dimensional vector: (C1; C2; C3; C4) o How strong will the breaker be in its open state? This can be quantified using the value of the lightning impulse withstand voltage (also known as Basic Insulation Level, BIL) according to IEC 60060-1 between terminals and to earth. Normalised KPI component 1: C1 = Peak of Prospective lightning impulse withstand / 650kV How strong will the breaker be in its closed state? This can be quantified using the value of the DC current that can flow through the closed breaker without damage. Based on common practice for alternating current CB testing this test can be performed at low voltage since the dielectric withstand is assessed through KPI component 1. Normalised KPI component 2: C2 = Rated current conduction (for 1 min) / 3000Adc What harm can we avoid using a DC circuit breaker? This can be quantified by comparing the forces acting on equipment in case of a fault with and without the protective action of DEMO 3. It is commonly agreed that forces on current carrying equipment are proportional to the square of the current. Hence the ratio of the peak forces is equal to the ration of the peak currents squared. Normalised KPI component 3: C3 = Peak force reduction ratio = (Peak of prospective fault current without protective action) / (Peak of fault current with DEMO 3 object) How fast is the current interrupted? The interruption duration (i.e. the duration from trip order till current interruption) can be compared to 40ms, a duration that is reached by alternating current CB. Normalized KPI component 4: C4 = 40ms / interruption duration
Page 25 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Start value: As no commercial D.C. fault current breaker exists, at the beginning of the project, the start value is (0; 0; 1; not defined). Target value: The target value to achieve is (1; 1; 1.21; 1) or better. KPI2 HVDC grid cases Number and complexity (number of nodes) of basic topologies investigated during the project. Initially: 1 structure, 2 nodes (PTPC) Target: at least 3 structures (star, ring, back-bone), each one with multiple connections to the AC grid (4 10 total nodes). KPI3 - Control and protection design / HVDC technology The design of control and protection schemes of the HVDC grid cases will strongly depend on the HVDC technology VSC (Light or Plus) or LCC, the DC/AC converters architecture (PWM, MultiModular ), the structure of marine cables This KPI will reflect the number of technologies and converters taken into account during the project. Initially: from scratch Target: 2 technologies + 2 types of converters KPI4 - Off-shore wind integration in the economic analysis Number of geographical areas and installed capacity of off-shore wind generation. Initially: 2 GW, North Target: 40 GW , and 3 geographical scenarios KPI5 Power transmission through the HVDC grid under contingency conditions This KPI should reflect the ability of a given HVDC topology for a given technology and appropriate control and protection schemes, to deliver power after a contingency has occurred (N-1 cable, N-1 converter, short-circuit, ). It will be expressed in % of the power transmitted in normal conditions. Initially: 0% for a PTPC (all the connected generation is lost simultaneously) Target: no complete loss of power with the maximum achievable value of transmitted power after a fault has occurred (10%, 20%, ?) A significant target value for this important KPI is very difficult to fix at the beginning of the project and dependent on the conclusions from DC breaker prototype. Next page table summarises the set of proposed KPIs for Demo 3 DC-Grid
Page 26 of 102

N KPI Metric C1: open state
KPI.D3.1
Initial value
Target Value
DC breaker prototype performance
C2: closed state C3: peak fault reduction C4: fault current interruption delay (0 0 1 x) (1 1 1.2 1)
KPI.D3.2
HVDC grid cases Control and protection design / HVDC technology Off-shore wind integration in the economic analysis Power transmission through the HVDC grid under contingency conditions
Number and complexity of basic topologies Number of technologies and converters Number of geographical areas Installed capacity % of the power transmitted in normal conditions
1 structure + 2 nodes (PTPC) None 1 2 GW 0% (for a PTPC)
3 structure + >4 nodes 2+2 3 40 GW >0% by steps of 10 %
KPI.D3.3
KPI.D3.4
KPI.D3.5
Page 27 of 102
2.4 DEMO #4 OFFSHORE WIND FARM MANAGEMENT UNDER STORMY CONDITIONS (STORM MANAGEMENT)
The European TSOs plan for a large amount of installed wind capacity in offshore wind farms leading to unsolved stability issues under both normal and more extreme circumstances. This demo will focus on severe situations caused by stormy conditions. In such situations there is a high risk for shutdowns of one or more wind farms. A sudden shutdown of one or a few wind farms does not jeopardize the safety of the European electricity system. However, a sudden shutdown of a larger number of wind farms due to for instance stormy conditions can cause instability in the system and may lead to blackouts. Demonstration 4 will explore how to improve the management of offshore wind power production without jeopardizing system safety. By foreseeing the situation, the right precautions can be taken so that the TSO can maintain control. Abrupt changes in wind power production under stormy conditions can be handled either by minimizing the shutdowns or by making sure that the imbalance caused by the shutdown is handled. In this demonstration both measures are addressed and combined strategies developed. This demonstration will show how the lost power due to a storm in Denmark can be replaced by hydro power from Norway, see Error! No se encuentra el origen de la referencia. below. The demonstration will be carried out using the Danish wind farm, Horns Rev 2 (HR2) which is owned by Dong Energy. Horns Rev 2 is located next to the Horns Rev off-shore park as illustrated in the Figure. The turbines at HR2 are manufactured by Siemens Wind Power. The Danish TSO, Energinet.dk, will be responsible for surveillance of the system and handling of the imbalance between expected and actual produced wind power by coordinated control of production and flow on the HVDC connection to Norway. After predicting stormy conditions Energinet.dk will issue down-regulation, send new schedules to Dong Energy, whom controls the ramping of HR2, and in addition balance the adjusted production by up-regulating the production from a Norwegian hydro power producer through the HVDC connection Skagerrak. Siemens Wind Power will develop a new controller (software) which will be installed in the turbines at HR2. This controller will enable improved operation under stormy conditions. With the help of this controller, the improved storm forecasting (done by Ris DTU) and improved HVDC real-time operation (by Sintef), Energinet.dk will perform a real-life demonstration of improved strategies for controlling the imbalance caused by HR2 during stormy conditions, within the timeframe of the TWENTIES project. Different control strategies for the HVDC connection are up for discussion. One option is that when the production deviates from plans during storms a signal is sent automatically from HR2 to the HVDC and the Norwegian hydro power producer in order to balance the production. Another option is to limit production in advance and manually buy hydro power in the already existing regulated power market. The latter will be based on new strategies for controlling the production and innovative use of forecasts. Finally the possibility of combining the automatic and manual control options will be investigated.
Page 28 of 102
Figure5:OverviewoftheDanishtransmissiongrid
Since market and operation of the transmission system are interdependent it is necessary to consider which implications this demonstration will have for the Nordic markets. In Denmark there is a small market for automatic regulating power (primary control). In addition Denmark is part of the common Nordic regulation power market (managed via NOIS the Nordic Operation Information System) where all regulating power in the Nordic countries is traded. The different control strategies discussed interferes heavily with the Nordic markets. If the regulation can be traded in the already existing manual regulating power market it does not require changes to already existing market rules. If the needed balancing power interferes with the automatic balancing power in Norway or Denmark we need to consider which changes are necessary to the existing market rules. 2.4.1.- Objectives, impacts and barriers The objective of Demo 4 is to demonstrate that stormy conditions can be handled in a better way that does not jeopardise the system security. This will be ensured by the following objectives: Improve assessment of offshore storm forecasting. An error in the storm forecasting causes great imbalances between predicted and actual wind power production. Hence an improved assessment of offshore storm forecasting will be an important step towards storm handling. Knowledge of behaviour and development of storms will be important parameters in the assessment. The storm www.twenties-project.eu Page 29 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI forecast assessment is an important input to the development of operational strategies for storm handling. Improve wind turbine flexibility. This will decrease the abrupt changes in production caused by stormy conditions. Increased turbine flexibility will enable the turbine to continue operation when the wind speed exceeds 25meters/second (m/s) instead of the more abrupt shutdown which is the case today. The output power at very high wind speeds will however be lowered in order to minimize structural loads so that the continued operation does not reduce the lifetime of the turbine significantly. This will make the change in wind energy due to a storm front smaller thus making it easier to handle from a system point of view. Explore different operational management strategies some of which will be tested in the Demo. A management strategy means both a definition of procedures and actions, that is both a definition of control strategies for handling wind farms under stormy conditions based on weather forecasts and a determination of the operational procedures and actions needed to carry the demonstration through. A control strategy for storm handling will be defined, developed and implemented by using wind power forecasts in an improved way. This will enable the TSO to operate in a structured and organized manner independently of the storm's wind profile. Operate the HVDC interconnection with respect to real-time balancing. In order to minimise stability problems, the response time of the HVDC connection is crucial for handling imbalances. Relevant time scales are between 1 and 3 minutes for primary control, 15 minutes for secondary control and up to 1 hour for activation of tertiary reserves. Define hydro power control strategies. The restrictions on the operation of the hydro power plant in relation to this demonstration will be assessed carefully. Besides covering market and technical restrictions this assessment will ensure that proper communication channels will be established, so that the demo can go ahead as planned. Investigate consequences for the Nordic system caused by this demonstration for the different solution methods proposed, e.g. dedicated HVDC control, control, control by hydro power plant or automatic generation control in the Norwegian system (AGC control). Explore reasonable compensation measures for forced regulations under stormy conditions.
Demonstration STORM MANAGEMENT is going to provide the following outcomes: Assessment of storm forecasting. Documentation of the development and test of a new controller which seeks to provide an improved relationship between wind speed and wind farm output power for wind speeds above 25 m/s. It is the slope of which the wind farm power declines when wind speeds exceed 25m/s which will be smaller. Relevant measurements will be logged under the demonstration. This will provide input to the up scaling objectives and deliverables in Twenties.
Page 30 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Operational management strategies and procedures will be developed. Description of the economic involvement in this demonstration. An simulation of a storm event. Description of different strategies for operating an HVDC connection of which some will be demonstrated. Implications for the Nordic system will be described.
Expected Impact The scope of the STORM MANAGEMENT demo is to provide the needed input-data required by WP15 and WP16 in order to scale results to a national level. The scaled results address the following expected impacts: Impact on wind turbine performance The aim is to assess the large scale consequences of an improved storm controller in the wind turbines. The expected impact will be a gradual shut down which will result in a more gradual change of production. Impact on balancing management by storm forecasting The aim is to assess strategies for using storm forecasting as part of an improved storm management. The expected impact will be control strategies during storms for which system security can be maintained even with large amounts of offshore wind power. Impact of hydro system control The aim is to assess strategies for using hydro power to balance the imbalances from storms at different timescales. The expected impact will be both the technical challenges and economic impacts resulting from using hydro power as balance power. Impact of coordinated action The aim is to assess strategies for coordinated actions initiated by the TSO for controlling the storm based on all the above. The expected impact will be recommendations on how to maintain system security during storm event when the amount of offshore wind increases dramatically. Barriers to be overcome This demo will focus on imbalance problems that are foreseen to arise when the amount of offshore wind power increases. Nowadays, meteorological facts indicate that there will on average be 2-3 storms (i.e. with wind speed more than 25 m/s) per year in the North Sea that causes wind turbines to shut down. This demo will address the different aspects of the sudden change of production in offshore wind production due to storm. These include mainly three aspects which are the following 1. The improved storm control of the turbines 2. The improved strategies for storm handling due to innovative use of storm forecasting 3. The assessment of strategies for using hydro power as a balancing power at different timescales.
Page 31 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI The results of this demonstration are expected to show how large amounts of offshore wind can be handled without jeopardising system safety. 2.4.2.- STORM MANAGEMENT KPIs
KPI1 Maximum power forecast error at wind farm level. The power forecast error is defined as the difference between the forecasted and produced power. The power is obtained from the forecasted and measured wind speeds, using the wind turbine power curve. The state of the art of the maximum power forecast error is defined and indexed as 1 p.u., resulting from the existing wind turbine power curve. The target is, with the new power curve in mind, to have a smoother transition leading to a maximum power forecast error of 0.2 p.u. The new power curve is expected to be available in the second year of the project. Maximum wind farm power forecast error targets are defined as follows: First year target: Second year target: KPI2 Improved wind turbine flexibility The wind turbine manufacturer will improve control to enable a more flexible operation during storm passages, i.e. operation also above 25 m/s, possibly at a reduced power. The new flexibility will be tested and certified on a wind turbine on land before it is implemented in all Horns Rev 2 wind turbines. With the current operations mode there is approximately 1 sudden shutdown for every 2 years operation time in Denmark e.g. 91 turbines at Horns Rev 2 running for one year is 91 operating years and would result in approximately 45 shutdowns caused by storm. The new operation mode should result in maximum 1 sudden shutdown for every 200 year of operating time in Denmark, measured in February 2013 e.g. 91 Horns Rev 2 turbines operating for 2 years, should result in maximum 2*91/200 = 0.91 sudden shutdowns. Number of turbines equipped with the new storm controller: First year target: 2 turbines Second year target: All turbines at Horns Rev 2 (Available for all Siemens Variable Speed turbines) KPI3 Management strategies for a storm To indicate the performance of Horns Rev 2 wind farm during a storm an amount of imbalance will be used. During the first year an evaluation of the average amount of imbalance caused by a storm will be made. The imbalance will be defined as the difference between the scheduled wind power, which is handed in half an hour before the operational hour, and the actual measured production. The imbalance will be summed over the timeframe of the entire storm. 1 p.u. 0. 2 p.u.
Page 32 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI This is illustrated in the figure below.
Figure6:ImbalancecalculationinDemo4STORMMANAGEMENT
The imbalance arise because the schedule, as delivered by the producer to the TSO half an hour before the hour of operation, does not always match the actual measured production. The red line illustrates the updated schedule. This resembles the best guess or the expected production. The shaded area illustrates the imbalance. From this base case the reduction in imbalance due to better storm handling and shutdown procedures will be: First year target Base case will be established and the imbalance will be calculated. In addition there will be an evaluation of how the improvement should be calculated. Second year target The imbalance will be reduced by 15% Third year target The 15% improvement shall be well documented, thereby enabling a better up scaling of the results. It should be noted that the imbalance from Horns Rev 2 caused by a storm is also heavily dependent on the storm cycle and weather predictions. Hence these factors have to be evaluated along with the improvement of storm handling for each of the different year-targets. KPI4 - Operating the HVDC interconnection with respect to real-time balancing. The KPI for operating the HVDC interconnection is the measured power flow at the Skagerrak HVDC as well as the power flow at the border between West-Denmark and Germany. These power flows are indicators of to which degree the hydro power from Norway can/will replace thermal units in Germany as balancing power supplied due to a storm event at HRB through the HVDC connection. More effective communication interface to the HVDC connection will improve the use of Norwegian hydro to www.twenties-project.eu Page 33 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI this purpose as well as better monitor that market restrictions are not limiting the operation. A new operation strategy for the HVDC connection will be developed. The development is scheduled as follows: First year target Based on system analysis and evaluation of different control implementations, the target is to determine which coordinated control system between the HVDC and hydro power plant is most suitable for the demo (conclusion of balance control framework report). Second year target The response time of the supplied regulating power is dependent on the implemented wind farm controller. With all interface communication between the HVDC connection and the wind farm implemented the amount/response time of the balance power supplied through the HVDC can be measured with the new wind turbine controller implemented. The measurement will be made with no automatic control on the hydro power side of the HVDC-link. The regulating power will be supplied through the existing regulating market. The time response to supply regulating power through the HVDC line will depend on the ramping on the wind farm. The following ramping rates will be considered: i) No Storm Control: 3 minutes shut-down of HRB, ii) Fast Storm Control: 15 minutes shut-down of the HRB; iii) Slow Storm Control: 1 hour shut-down of HRB. These time scales of 3 minutes, 15 minutes and 1 hour are quite relevant as they represent the response times of primary, secondary and tertiary reserves. Power flows between Skagerrak HVDC and West-DK and DE will be monitored for the different control strategies to see how hydro power from Norway can/will replace thermal units in Germany as balancing power Third year target The response time for supplying balancing power through the HVDC line is reduced because of the implementation of the automatic control and new wind turbine controller. This KPI involves changing the control of the HVDC to supply regulating power in the event of a storm. This involves also reviewing and possibly removing existing market restrictions or implementing new market rules to account for operation of the HVDC during storm events. The activities aim to reduce the time for supplying regulating power through the HVDC. The time response to supply regulating power through the HVDC line is then expected to be further reduced compared to second year target time. In addition, more hydro power from Norway is expected to replace thermal units in Germany as balancing power if more advanced control strategies are implemented. KPI5 - Hydro power control strategies The KPI for operating the hydro power is measured through the deviation from nominal frequency in the Norwegian system when responding with balancing power because of a storm event in HRB. This involves changing the communication interface to the hydro power station and ensuring that market or technical restrictions in the hydro power plant are not limiting the operation. The simulations will include AGC-ACE solution in West DK-UCTE and then follow the list of different cases including the different ramps mentioned and different control strategies for HVDC, Hydro unit and AGC-ACE also for the Nordic region. Focus on frequency quality in the Nordic region will be used as indicator of to www.twenties-project.eu Page 34 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI which degree the hydro power from Norway can/will replace thermal units in DE when variations of wind power occur in West-Denmark without violating the operational limits of the Nordel system. The development is scheduled according to the following: First year target Based on system analysis and evaluation of different control implementations, the target is to determine which coordinated control system between the HVDC and hydro power plant is most suitable for the demo (conclusion of balance control framework report). Second year target The time response of balance power supplied by the hydro power plant will be monitored by measuring the "quality of frequency" at the point of connection of the Hydro unit. Dedicated control of the hydro unit to follow the ramping of HRB will be implemented first without automatic generation control (AGC) in the Nordic region (today's situation - today's balancing market) and new wind turbine controller will be measured with communication interface implemented. PMU measurements will be used for monitoring the performance of the hydro unit and HVDC link. Third year target The time response of balance power supplied by the hydro power plant will be monitored by measuring the quality of frequency at the point of connection of the Hydro unit. Dedicated control of the hydro unit to follow the ramping of HRB will be implemented in this case with automatic generation control (AGC) in the Nordic region (future situation with automatic LFC implemented for balancing in Nordic system) and new wind turbine controller will be measured with communication interface implemented. PMU measurements will be used for monitoring the performance of the hydro unit and HVDC link. The response of balance power supplied by the hydro power station with automatic control implemented and communication with the new wind turbine controller will be measured. The quality of the frequency when supplying regulating power by the hydro power station because of a storm event is expected to be further increased compared to second year target.
Page 35 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI The table below summarises the set of proposed KPIs for Demo #4.
N KPI Metric The power forecast error is defined as the difference between the forecasted and produced power. The power is obtained from the forecasted and measured wind speeds, using the wind turbine power curve. The wind turbine manufacturer will improve the control to enable a more flexible operation during storm passages, i.e. operation also above 25 m/s, possibly at a reduced power. The new flexibility will be tested and certified on a wind turbine on land before it is implemented in all Horns Rev 2 wind turbines. With the current operations mode there is approximately 1 sudden shutdown per 2 year operation time in Denmark e.g. 91 turbines at Horns Rev 2 running one year is 91 operating years and would result in approximately 45 shutdowns caused by storm. The new operation mode should result in maximum 1 sudden shutdown per 200 year of operating time in Denmark, measured in February 2013 e.g. 91 Horns Rev 2 turbines operating 2 years, should result in maximum 2*91/200 = 0.91 sudden shutdowns. Initial value Target Value
KPI.D 4.1
Maximum power forecast error on wind farm level Improved wind turbine flexibility
1 p.u.
0.2 p.u.
2 turbines
All turbines at Horns Rev 2 (Available for all Siemens Variable Speed turbines)
KPI.D 4.2
KPI.D 4.3
Management strategies for a storm
To indicate the performance of Horns Rev 2 wind farm during a storm the amount of imbalance will be used. During the first year an evaluation of the average amount of imbalance caused by a storm will be made. The imbalance will be defined as the difference between the scheduled wind power, which is handed in half an hour before the operational hour, and the actual measured production. The imbalance will be summed over the timeframe of the entire storm. First year target Base case will be established and the imbalance will be calculated. In addition there will be an evaluation of how the improvement should be
Second year target The imbalance will be reduced by 15%
Third year target The 15% improvement shall be well documented, thereby enabling a better up scaling of the results.
Page 36 of 102

calculated.
Operating the HVDC interconnecti on with respect to real-time balancing

KPI.D 4.4
The KPI for operating the HVDC interconnection is measured through the time response of balance power supplied as a cause of storm event through the HVDC connection. This involves changing the communication interface to the HVDC connection and ensuring that market restrictions are not limiting the operation. A new operation strategy for the HVDC connection will be developed. The development is scheduled according to the following: First year target Based on system analysis and evaluation of different control implementations, the target is to determine which coordinated control system between the HVDC and hydro power plant is most suitable for the demo (conclusion of balance control framework report).
Second year target

The response time of the supplied regulating power is dependent on the implemented wind farm controller. With all interface communication between the HVDC connection and the wind farm implemented the amount/response time of balance power supplied through the HVDC can be measured with the new wind turbine controller implemented. The measurement will be made with no automatic control on the hydro power side of the HVDC-link. The regulating power will be supplied through the existing regulating market. The time response to supply regulating power through the HVDC line is expected to be tHVDC_storm<900s (<15 minutes).
Third year target

The response time for supplying balancing power through the HVDC line is reduced because of the implementation of the automatic control and new wind turbine controller. This KPI involves changing the control of the HVDC to supply regulating power in the event of a storm. This involves also reviewing and possibly removing existing market restrictions or implementing new market rules to account for operation of the HVDC during storm events. The activities aim to reduce the time for supplying regulating power through the HVDC. The time response to supply regulating power through the HVDC line is then expected to be optimized.
Hydro power control strategies

KPI.D 4.5
The KPI for operating the hydro power is measured through the time response of balance power supplied as a cause of storm event. This involves changing the communication interface to the hydro power station and ensuring that market or technical restrictions in the hydro power plant are not limiting the operation. The development is scheduled according to the following: First year target Based on system analysis and evaluation of different control implementations, the target is to determine which coordinated control system between the HVDC and hydro power plant is most suitable for the demo (conclusion of balance control framework report).
Second year target

The time response of balance power supplied by the hydro power plant with no automatic control and new wind turbine controller will be measured with communication interface implemented. The time response to supply regulating power by the hydro power station as a cause of storm incident is expected to be: thydro_storm<900s (<15 minutes).
Third year target

The time response of balance power supplied by the hydro power station with automatic control implemented and communication with the new wind turbine controller will be measured. The time response to supply regulating power by the hydro power station as a cause of storm event is expected to be optimized.
Page 37 of 102
2.5 DEMO #5 NETWORK ENHANCED FLEXIBILITY (NETFLEX)

2.5.1.- Objectives, impacts and barriers Demonstrate the enhanced flexibility provided by forecasting overhead line capacities using Dynamic Line Rating (using the transducer Ampacimon) and wind forecasts and by coordinating the use of controllable devices (Phase Shifting Transformers [PSTs] and High Voltage Direct Current [HVDC] links) at a pan-European level. Nevertheless because a better use of the grid also means increasing the flows, system stability must be monitored and Good Operating Practices (GOPs) have to be developed for security of supply purposes. One frequently hears that electricity follows Kirchhoffs law. Thats true. But people saying this mean the following. A key characteristic of electricity is that it is not routable, i.e. Transmission System Operators (TSOs) cannot route it and therefore have to face the consequences. This means that congestions have to be prevented as much as possible and in an economical way. These days, TSOs have several means to influence electricity flows: switching capabilities of electrical equipments to configure the topology of the network, adapting output of generating units, scheduling generation programs, planning maintenance, limiting exchange capacities between countries. However these means were successful in the decades up till now, this approach becomes more and more limited as uncertainties quickly increase fast: the variability of the flows increases while TSOs grid actions are binary (on/off) and slow. Obviously investing in additional electrical infrastructures is mandatory to face uncertainties but it is not sufficient to keep up with the changes. To increase network flexibility some TSOs have already installed controllable devices like PSTs or HVDC-links in their system. But what are the sources of uncertainty? A primary source of uncertainty is the increasing number of market players who will be able to change the flow pattern of the ENTSO-E grid up to near real time. This results in the need for more observability of the European interconnected grid (the ability to evaluate the impact of decisions or incidents on neighbouring grids) The ENTSO-E system is so large that it is a challenge to compute real-time security analyses on the full system. Actually this challenge comes not only from the amount of data to handle, keep it up-to-dated but also from the ability to interpret results. Security analysis results cannot be used without the interpretation of experienced system operators, simply because the calculation model cannot include every topological counter-measure. Because of the increasing need of observability, coordination and consultation between neighbouring TSOs before implementing counter-measures beforehand becomes more important, which takes time and slows down the decision process and hence could endanger the system. A second source of uncertainty is integration of wind power and more generally speaking all sources of intermittent power. The pattern of flows over the pan-European network completely differs with the wind situation: wind power creates loop flows in the interconnected European grid. Congestions are more and more complicated to anticipate and, because wind forecasts have a limited accuracy, wind power integration imposes an additional security margin to operate the system in a safe and reliable way. But wind has also its benefits: e.g. when the wind blows, overhead lines are better cooled and can transport more power. Enhancing the flexibility of the network means developing and implementing technologies to handle these uncertainties.
Page 38 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI The most relevant outcomes of NETFLEX is enhancing the flexibility of the network which means developing and implementing technologies to handle these uncertainties. NETFLEX will demonstrate the enhanced flexibility provided by: Overhead line capacities (Amperes) forecaster 10 Ampacimon devices will be installed in the Belgian (Elia) grid by the end of 2010 using Dynamic Line Rating DLR (using the transducer Ampacimon) and wind forecasts (history over 2008-2009 + daily data) 1 server to handle Ampacimon data at Coreso coordination centre by the beginning of 2011
Tool for establishing Good Operating Practices (GOPs) in order to monitor and control the system stability 1 Phasor Measurement Unit (PMU) in the Belgian grid by mid 2011 1 PMU in the French grid by mid 2011 1 PMU in another grid (under discussion with TenneT) by the end of 2011 1 Phasor Data Concentrator at Coreso to collect the information from the PMUs and postprocess the data.
Tool (algorithm) for coordinated use of controllable devices (PSTs and HVDC-links) at a pan-European level on a 24 hours sliding window integration and implementation of the algorithms (DLR forecaster + GOP constrainer + Smart-Power Flow Control PFC optimizer) in 2011
During 2011 and 2012, all algorithms will continue to be improved based on feedback of grid operators Expected Impact of NETFLEX Impact of Dynamically Forecasting Line Ratings The aim is to figure out the expected increase in overhead line capacities that will result in increased overall capacities, a.o. NTCs, and hence will allow to accommodate additional wind generation while keeping a similar reliability level. Impact of Controlling Smartly PSTs and HVDC links The aim is also to figure out, through a pan-European coordination of controllable devices that considers the sequential aspect of system operation (future needs for actions may not be jeopardised by present actions), the expected decrease in close-to-the-limit flows that will result in increased NTCs and hence will allow to accommodate additional wind generation while keeping a similar reliability level. Combined impact of these technologies The aim is to figure out the expected increase in NTCs resulting from combining Dynamic Forecast of Line Rating and Smart Control of Controllable Devices that will allow to accommodate additional wind generation while keeping a similar reliability level. Impact on the stability of the system Finally the aim is to figure out if the resulting increase in flows does not endanger system stability by monitoring the system using WAMS.
Page 39 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Barriers to be overcome Technical There is a technical barrier at the level of the overhead line capacities (Amperes) forecaster as the main factor influencing this capacity is wind at very low speed (the cooling effect changes drastically from 0 to 2 m/s of wind). Its possible that forecasting overhead line capacities does not work sufficiently well to be valuable for system operation. Strategic The coordination of the tap positions of PSTs and control of HVDC links is a sensitive issue because the impact on the flows exceeds the control zones of the TSOs concerned. TSOs are convinced of the need for more coordination but the balance between the interests of the national stakeholders (regulators, market parties, TSOs,) and more European coordination is a challenge and possibly a barrier to success. 2.5.2.- NETFLEX KPIs Dynamic Line Rating Ampacimon devices are installed on an overhead line and determine the sag and translate it into available ampacity. A few Ampacimon devices have already been installed in the Belgian and French grids in pilot projects. Inside NETFLEX, 10 additional Ampacimons, now distributed, are going to be installed in the Belgian grid on two 150kV overhead lines that are the bottlenecks for connecting offshore wind farms on the Belgian coast. Some of the innovative part begins here. In addition to alleviating the bottleneck issue, the installation will be used to evaluate the combined effect of increased ampacity of the overhead lines together with (potential) wind farm production and how to extrapolate that ampacity to a larger region, like Central Western Europe area (CWE). This will be combined with grid stability concerns and phase shifters actions on a large regional point of view. Because anticipation is key in managing power systems, wind and flow forecasts will be used to predict the ampacity of equipped overhead lines for the J+1 (coming 24 hours) and J+2 (48 h). Obviously real time observations will be used to activate prepared scenarios in case of inconsistence between predictions and actual situations. Looking at both the evolution of some particular error and of the distribution (normal distribution) of the error may be important to measure the performance of the technologies in place. In this case the evolution of the maximum error will probably be a more relevant factor. KPI
KPI.D5.DLR.1 KPI.D5.DLR.2 KPI.D5.DLR.3
Description (distribution of the) ratios between seasonal ampacity and measured ampacity the ratio of wind power that could be installed on site with or without DLR information (distribution of the) error between the measured ampacity and forecasted ampacity
Unit % % MW
Target Mu = 20% P(<sa) < 0.05 30.00% Mu = 5% P(>10%) < 0.05
Page 40 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Smart Power Flow Control PSTs have been installed at the Dutch-German border, in the German grid (Amprion and TenneT Germany), and at the Belgian-Dutch border. A HVDC-link is in operation between France and UK. Another one is under construction between The Netherlands and UK and will be commissioned in 2011. These devices have a physical impact not only on their immediate surroundings but also on the whole Central Western European grid (and more). It also implies more coordination still among TSOs. Coordination rules have also been defined for planning activities but its even more complicated as many decisions have to be taken by every TSO. Algorithms exist to optimize the setting of PSTs in a seemingly coordinated way. It is only seemingly coordinated because the objective function chosen and pursued only satisfies one or two TSOs in the region (e.g. limit (uncertainty of) loop flows in order to maximize capacities on the Belgian borders or maximize capacities on the Dutch borders). As stated earlier anticipating is a key function in managing power systems. An algorithm will be developed for setting the PSTs and HVDC-links (all controllable devices) of the region considering the coming 24 hours. To do so, wind generation forecasts, conventional generation forecasts, demand forecasts, topology forecasts, and exchanges forecasts are necessary. First, the DACF (Day Ahead Congestion Forecast) data will be used because they include all these elements. Second, these data will be permanently updated in intraday to cover the remaining hours of the day. The outcome of the algorithm will be a pattern of settings for the PSTs and the HVDC-links. It must state the amount of the transversal power flow through the system taking into account the PSTs and HVDCs, or in other words, the amount of power flow that can be handled in the system, by redirecting power flows with the help of PSTs in case of congestion when wind energy is integrated into the system. Because there is an uncertainty with the wind (not only) the algorithm will assess how much wind generation volatility can be securely handled in the system taking into consideration the controllable devices. Assumptions will have to be made on how the uncertainty is distributed over the system. The algorithm will be able to handle scenarios. It is obvious that positive deviations (increases in wind generation) are constraints but open-questions exist on how to evaluate negative deviations. In the sequel deviation stands for the amount of wind uncertainty the system can absorb while maintaining the same security level. In fact no distinction can be made between the uncertainty that would come from real time fluctuations and from the forecast error.
Illustration: Lets assume that the forecast is 18000MW of electricity from wind in CWE. Based on sound scenarios of wind changes in CWE, the algorithm will compute how much the system can handle on top of this, e.g. 2500 MW. The algorithm will also compute how less the system can also handle without reaching another limit, e.g. -8000 MW (because of flow, spinning reserve, cold reserve...). The total amount is the uncertainty the system can face. The bigger it is the more flexible is the grid.
Hopefully the algorithm will run each hour with updated data for the remaining hours of the day. Lets imagine that from one hour to the next the algorithm proposes completely different settings without any major event occurring in the system. Intuitively it should not be. Therefore the stability of the settings will be considered as an image of the capacity to anticipate.
Illustration: Lets assume we are at hour h. At h-1 the algorithm has computed tap positions for each PST and HVDC link for each of the coming hours. The recommended tap position of each piece of equipment must not differ consequentially, i.e. the recommended tap position for h+6 from the optimization made at h must not differ much from the one for h+7 from the optimization made at h-1.
Page 41 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Because unplanned outages occur and completely change the operation one will observe large changes. By looking at the distribution of changes one looks at the whole picture that will reveal more about the enhanced flexibility than any particular single observation. KPI
KPI.D5.Smart-PFC.1
Description (distribution of the) ratio between the additional transverse power flow through the system considering controllable devices and the transverse flow w/o (distribution of the) ratio between the positive and negative deviations and the wind uncertainty distribution of the change in settings distribution of the ratio between the change in positive and negative deviations and the wind uncertainty
Unit %
Target Mu = 25.00% Mu = 120% -3< x <3 Mu = 20%
KPI.D5.Smart-PFC.2 KPI.D5.Smart-PFC.3 KPI.D5.Smart-PFC.4
% # taps %
Wide Area Measurement System The coordinated use of PSTs and HVDC-links will controlthe flows in the system. Because flows are managed, this coordinated use will increase the utilisation of the grid. Unfortunately this higher use of the grid and the effect of PSTs and HVDC-links that change the characteristics of the system can have a negative impact on the stability of the grid. Three Phasor Measurement Units (PMUs) will be installed in CWE. A PMU is a device providing accurate frequency, current and voltage measurements, with both amplitude and phase angle, thanks to time synchronization. Once the data from PMUs are collected an algorithm computes the damping factor of the system. A data concentrator will be installed in Coreso to collect the measurements and transform them into valuable variables. A dynamic model of the system will be used to assess the damping factor and simulations will be performed to determine GOPs. Afterwards, the methodology used to determine the GOPs on the model will be applied on the real system. GOPs will then be translated into constraints and included into the Smart-PFC algorithm. However, the ability to extract GOPs in the real system is dependent on the existence and observability of the critical inter-area modes. The second KPI will be strongly dependent on the first KPI. KPI
KPI.D5.WAMS.1
Description (distribution of the) damping factor of the dominant modes robustness of GOPs
Unit % Freque ncy of revision
Target Sigma = 5.00% < 3/y
KPI.D5.WMAS.2
Impact assessment methodology The objective is to estimate the additional amount of wind generation that can be accommodated in the system because of the new technologies. From an operational point of view it can also be considered as the amount of wind uncertainty the system can absorb while maintaining the same security level, and their respective distribution (expressed in MW).
Page 42 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Note that a deployment must be already considered to do so as we are looking at system level (rather than at local level). This KPI NETFLEX will be computed for different situations: 1. From the current situation w/o considering the ampacity provided by DLR, w/o using the PSTs and HVDC-links and w/o any GOP. 2. Then the gain from using DLR will be evaluated. 3. Then the gain from optimizing PSTs and HVDC-links. 4. Then the possible loss from GOPs. The increase in margin reflects the enhanced flexibility offered to the network by the demos technologies. Our feeling is that for the time being the existing margin is considered as very limited because of a very few congested hours (minutes) each day while margins exist the rest of the time. Ampacimons, Smart-PFC, WAMS technologies, and coordination will together alleviate these congestions and hence increase the available margin when it is limited.
Gain from PSTs and HVDC-links Loss from GOPs Created M argin
Maximum Positive and Negative Deviations
Gain from DLR Existing M argin Initial Positive and Negative Deviations Initial Situation
Figure7:IncreaseinmargincalculationinDemo5NETFLEX
The additional amount of wind generation that the system can handle because of the technologies developed in NETFLEX will be translated into an estimated amount of decrease in CO2 emissions. Also the impact on the price of electricity will be estimated. KPI
KPI.D5.NETFLEX.1 KPI.D5.NETFLEX.2 KPI.D5.NETFLEX.3 KPI.D5.NETFLEX.4 KPI.D5.NETFLEX.4
Description distribution of the current capability in accommodating additional wind generation distribution of the gain from DLRs distribution of the gain from Smart-PFC distribution of the loss from GOPs distribution of the combined gain of the technologies
Unit % % % % %
Target Mu = 0% Mu = 5% Mu = 5% Mu = -2% Mu = 10%
Page 43 of 102
2.6
DEMO #6 IMPROVING THE FLEXIBILITY OF THE TRANSMISSION GRID (FLEXGRID)
2.6.1.- Objectives, impacts and barriers Under the management of RED ELECTRICA, and with the support of manufacturers (ABB, SIEMENS), the present demonstration aims at introducing into the network operation and control the use of Dynamic Line Rating and Overload Line Controller devices in order to increase significantly the network capacity and the integration of renewable energy. This goal can be broken-down into the following common objectives for both parts of the demosntration: 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.
We distinguish between three different, but interconnected, parts in this DEMO according to the following scheme:
Figure8:StructureschemeofDemo6FLEXGRID
Part 1. - Identification of the latent capacity of the network using Real Time Thermal Ratings (RTTR) Currently, the capacity of the transmission lines is determined using static parameters. These static parameters are used for all the uncertain variables involved in the calculation of the available capacity and allow the operation of the lines in safe conditions. However, current trends in the search for efficiency in all sectors, as well as the difficulties in constructing new overhead lines in some areas, require finding alternatives to enable an optimal exploitation of the existing lines. Among the existing methods, this project includes the monitoring of overhead lines as a step towards a more efficient utilization of the actual capacities of the transmission lines and, eventually, of the whole power system in real time. There are several monitoring methods, using different inputs or combinations of inputs of the variables involved in the calculation of the transmission capacity. Each www.twenties-project.eu Page 44 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI system uses its theoretical principle of operation and requires different measurement sensors to calculate the real-time capacity of the lines. Real time monitoring of Transmission lines capacity may be, in the future, an integrated element in the control systems of the utilities. This could allow optimizing not only the operation of the available transmission grid, but also grid planning including the prioritization of the investments and ultimately, the excellence in the operation of the electricity networks. The purpose of the first part of the demonstration is to show that transmission lines can be operated using dynamic ratios instead of static seasonal ratings since most of the times the most constraining piece of equipment in the transmission capacity of existing lines remains the overhead lines and the cooling effect of the wind over them. Therefore one of the main targets in FLEXGRID will be to validate that there is indeed a correlation between wind power generation (as a percentage of wind power installed) in a local area and the transmission capacity of the grid lines in the same area. The new results obtained in this demonstration will outline the correlation between such meteorological parameters affecting wind production and the overhead lines capacity. From the practical point of view, in contrast with NETFLEX demo this main objective will be addressed by benchmarking different technologies for RTTR measurements currently available in the market instead of using one single technology (Ampacimon). During the first months of the project, the following technologies have been considered: SagoMeter: Basically consist on a camera able to calculate the distance of the conductor to the soil. This technology has not ever been installed in REE and it has been initially discarded because it is an expensive material for being in the field under prevailing weather conditions and without supervision. Ampacimon: It calculates the sag using the natural frecuency of the conductor. As this technology will be already tested in NETFLEX demo, it wont be implemented in FLEXGRID for the moment. Meteorological Stations: Monitoring of ambient parameters to calculate the temperature of the conductor based on heat transfer algorithms. SMT-Sensor Measure of Temperature: Direct measurement of the conductor temperature in one specific point. CAT-1 Device: It measures the mechanical tense of the conductor and with this parameter it can be calculated the sag of the conductor.
The last three technologies have been deployed by REE in the last years but not really tested given the complexity of the data mining analysis to be performed over the data collected for its application. The common problem of all these technologies is that all of them are based on punctual measurements in some selected points (the most critical ones) but do not provide information of the situation along the whole line. This feature would introduce large amounts of uncertainty in the operation according to the transmission capacity calculated by these methods and hinders its application in real time operation as the security is the main issue. In order to cope with this limitations and to definitely asses the quality of the above mentioned methods, at the beginning of the project REE started to study the possibility of installing a brand new technology based on fibre optics: OPPC: Optical phase conductor. It consists on an optical fibre integrated in overhead line conductor. This technology allows monitoring the temperature in the core of the conductor with an accuracy of 1 to 3 degrees Celsius and whats more relevant, along the whole line enabling the detection of hot spots with a 10 meters granularity.
Page 45 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI The main disadvantage of OPPC is its high cost and the fact that its installation requires the replacement of an existing conductor or its ad hoc inclusion in a new line in which the transmission capacity is not typically so constrained. For this reason, the results of the OPPC tests will be used as well to cross-check the data obtained from other technologies and conclude if they are reliable enough to be used widely in real operation. These conclusions will be useful also for NETFLEX demo. Currently it is being performed the study of the potential sites to install the OPPC technology.
Part 2.- Maximum use of the available capacity. Mobile Overload Line Controller (OLC) to redirect flows Most of the renewable power plants are installed where there is a primary energy resource available and a close connection point to the grid. This is why such power plants can dramatically change former power flows and lead to local overloads of grid devices (lines, cables and transformers). Grid development usually tries to plan new facilities in order to avoid such overloads but usually it takes much time. In addition the average generation of renewable power plants works 25% of equivalent hours yearly, this means a great variability thus, new lines will probably be under loaded the rest of the time. For these reasons appropriate solutions demand providing these lines with more flexibility. The objective of this part of the demonstration is to test with ABB a mobile Overload Line Controller (OLC). The main advantages of an OLC compared to a conventional PST are: This device acts faster than a PST and can shift operating point to relief the overload on transmission lines within seconds, allowing more corrective actions rather than costly preventive actions. The transmission line can therefore be operated closer to its natural limits which results in increased transmission capability that otherwise would be wasted for renewable energy evacuation avoiding potential curtailments. This device can keep a preset target value of a flow in a line during a number of different contingencies with automatic control: this cannot be done easily by changing the taps of a PST (more constraints in PST)
Figure9:BasicschemeofOLCinDemo6FLEXGRID
Page 46 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI The device will offer a standarized design and lay out that will allow portability and mobility within the network, thus increasing the overall flexibility of the network.
In turn, when a highly precise control over the line flow is required, PST offer fine tuning (just a continue control instead of stepwise control) capabilities and also they are more compacted solutions, important feature when the space needs become an issue. The device to be developed and installed in FLEXGRID Demo is the result of an innovative combination of reactor switch control steps with high end control systems. During the first months of the project, the work team has been deeply involved in the first stage of the specification as well as the assessment and selection of the location to install the OLC. This assessment has been very complex. Given the functional criteria in line with project objectives a first selection of potential locations was elaborated and over this selection different filters were applied in order to consider the tight actual restrictions coming from network planning, space requirements and criticality of the location. This way, the initial list was reduced to six possible substations and finally to one. The selected site is Magalln 220 kV substation and OLC will be used to command the flow in the overhead line Magalln Tudela 220 kV located in the north of Spain. In the pictures below green lines represent 220 kV level and red ones mean 400 kV level.
Figure10:SelectedlocationforOLCinDemo6FLEXGRIDGeographicallocation
Page 47 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI The flows through Magalln Tudela 220 kV are highly affected by wind power and CCGT production in this area and they can become higher than the nominal transfer capacity in the event of contingencies in any surrounding line. For this reason it is necessary to install a device able to route the in flows through other parallel lines and also the implementation of protection schemes. The picture below shows the grid scheme in this area; again green lines and boxes represent 220 kV lines and substations while red ones mean 400 kV level.
Barcina
Castejn
Olite
Quel Elica
S. Engracia
La Serna
La Serna
Arrbal R.Jaln Terrer
Tudela Elica Magalln Magalln
Entrerros
Aragn
Peaflor
Monte Torrero
Figure11:SelectedlocationforOLCinDemo6FLEXGRIDGridscheme
Part 3.- Model validation and measurement of the real operation The objective of this task is the development of tools to integrate all the results obtained in the previeous parts within the existing REE EMS system and measure the behaviour of the devices installed Concerning Part 1: Models validation and operation tools, implementation on the EMS system. This task deals with the integration and adaptation of the existing EMS system in order to run the capacity vs. wind correlation algorithms (developed in WP8) and to integrate these solutions within State estimation, Power Flow and Contingency analysis applications. The system will work with real time data however; the analysis will be done in an off-line mode. Moreover, it is assumed that some modifications will be needed on the EMS system in order to optimize the operation of the RTTR and FACT devices developed.
Concerning Part 2: Measure the behaviour of the devices in service and conclusions The main challenge of this Demo 6 FLEXGRID is the real installation of the devices in the field.
Page 48 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI In order to assess these results, a set of KPI will be defined and a complete evaluation of the behaviour of the devices will be performed. The results of this analysis will be the basis for the WP15 and WP16.
Expected Impact FLEXGRID RTTR Technology: Determination of the correlation between the wind power generation (as a percent of installed wind power) in a wide area and the transmission capacity of the grid in that area.
Models and new algorithms in order to expand the capability of the network to evacuate more wind energy and to improve security by means of the implementation of dynamic line rating. The implementation of the device provides data of the real capacity of the line, so it will allow minimizing the restrictions to the intermittent generation. This will result in avoided losses of profit for these generator promoters. Allow more flexible operation of the lines to improve the operation in N and N-X situations. Provide data for the predictive maintenance and preservation of the life span in transmission facilities
FLEXGRID FACTS Technology: Ideally, grid planning should provide a network able to transmit and manage the power flows from the wind power producers. However, for several reasons during the last years in most European countries it has been more time consuming to build new lines (to comply with the planning) than installing thousands of MW of wind power. This situation along with the dispersion and variability of this generation which makes feasible a huge range of generation scenarios which cause in some areas and for some periods of time a mismatch between the optimal and the actual grid configuration. Technical control conditions that an OLC prototype must provide to be able to manage the transmission capacity of a power line and where to install it in the grid in such a way that its impact on the power flow control is optimal in order to help massive RES integration.
New alternative device to use in the network planning. The implementation of the device provides data of the real capacity of the line, so it will allow minimizing the restrictions to the intermittent generation. This will result in avoided losses of profit for these generator promoters.
BOTH TECHNOLOGIES:
Demonstration of the use of Dynamic Line Rating and Overload Controller devices in order to increase significantly the network capacity and the integration of renewable energy.
Solve problems related to the delays on planned infrastructures, better exploitation of existing infrastructure
Page 49 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Barriers FLEXGRID RTTR Technology:
Because of the wind speed could be a very local factor and the cooling effect over transmission lines depends significantly on its relative directions, the correlation between wind production and evacuation capacity is not evident when considering long distances as it is very complex to estimate precisely the transmission capacity along the whole line. The implementation of this technology involves the use of a special conductor wire with optic fiber inside so it is linked to the construction of a new line or upgrading (conductor replacement) of the existing line. Therefore, site selection for the demonstration has several constraints. The technology must meet the minimum safety standards with laboratory tests to ensure it does not produce technical problems in the grid.
FLEXGRID FACTS Technology:
The OLC technology deployment has large space requirements therefore the site selection becomes a difficult task. There should be important detailed engineering work to ensure the successful implementation. The control of the different reactors has to be developed with special care in order to ensure the stability of the electrical signal. The different components should be accordingly sized to guarantee the correct durability and reliability of the solution as well as its maintenance.
BOTH TECHNOLOGIES: The outcomes of both demo parts must result in contrasted, dependable and high quality operation data for deserving to be integrated and used into dispatch centre tools.
2.6.2.- FLEXGRID KPIs In this section, the KPIs of Demo 6 are included: Part 1. To identify the latent capacity of the network using Real Time Thermal Ratings (RTTR) General Index KPI.D6.1. - Correlation between RTTR and Wind Generation KPI.D6.1 will be 1 if a significant and usable correlation between the Real Time Thermal Rating of one or several transmission lines properly chosen and Wind Generation level in the area is found. If a good enough correlation is found, a new concept that could be called Statistical RTTR (SRTTR) will be defined and used in the project. KPI.D6.1 will be 0 if the correlation between the above mentioned variables is not significant enough or if this correlation cannot be used for RTTR with the needed reliability even with the appropriate security margins. In this case, SRTTR will not be used in the project. www.twenties-project.eu Page 50 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Target value: Confirm a significant correlation
KPI.D6.2. - Line Capacity Gain obtained by using RTTR or SRTTR (MVA or %) Hourly Values For each monitored line, KPI2 at hour h is defined as: KPI.D6.2.1h =C1C2 (MVA) KPI.D6.2.2h = (C1 C2) / C2 (%) Where C1 is the line capacity at hour h using RTTR or SRTTR and C2 is the seasonal line rating. Yearly Values For each monitored line, the yearly value of KPI2 is defined as the addition of KPI2h for all hours h of the year with positive gain divided by 8760 hours (average gain). KPI.D6.2Y = KPI.D6.2.2h / 8760 (for all h with KPI.D6.2.2h) > 0 Target value: 15% gain KPI.D6.3. - Errors in the forecast of the Thermal Rating For each monitored line, the error in the forecast of the line capacity at hour h is: Error h = (CA CB) / CB (%) Where CA is the line capacity at time t forecasted in the 2 hours ahead time horizon (2HATR) and CB is the line rating (or line capacity) at time t evaluated in real time (RTTR). KPI3 is defined as the standard deviation of all the errors obtained in one year. Target value: Not higher than 35%
Part 2. Maximum use of the available capacity. Mobile Overload Line Controller (OLC), Redirection of flows. To be consistent with the rest of the KPIs at Demo level, the proposed KPIs regarding this part of the FLEXGRID demo, will be calculated according to the data collected during the project. However in order to avoid biased results because of the suitability of the final location of the OLC device, the analysis will be completed in WP15 and 16 with simulations to assess the benefits that would bring its installation in some other virtual locations where the Device will not be installed (because of the critical nature of these other locations, because other technical reasons or just because there is only one Device available in the project to demonstrate the benefits that its use can allow to achieve) The evaluation of the KPIs in the virtual locations will be made by comparison of two situations of the power system: www.twenties-project.eu Page 51 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI a) The real one that did happen, without the Device b) The virtual one, simulating the system state if the Device were installed In the real situations some measures different to Use de Device to re-address power flows will have been taken to ensure system security. These can be for example, curtailing wind production, redispatching thermal generation or changing the topology of the grid (where it is feasible). Then, the use of the Device if it were installed at that virtual location, would have allowed to reduce the amount of wind production curtailed (or to avoid it completely), to save in re-dispatching costs of the thermal generation or to avoid the undesired use of topological changes. Reduction of CO2 emissions can also be achieved and, in this case, evaluated Indicator KPI.D6.4: Capacity Gain due to the use of the Device Capacity Gain due to the use of the Device: energy evacuation capacity (in MW or in %) from one congested zone of the grid that will be available for the transmission of the renewable production out of that zone. Three types of scenarios will be used: 1. Real Scenarios already happened before the Device is installed 2. Real Scenarios that will happen within the project during the time that the device is available. 3. Forecasted Scenarios for a next future
KPI.D6.4h. Hourly values The energy evacuation capacity (in MW) of the chosen zone of the power system will be computed in two situations: a. With the Device installed: The result will be denominated Cwi b. Without the Device: The result will be denominated Cwo The calculation of Cwi and Cwo will be done always using the same criteria, which will correspond to the n and n-1 security criteria established in the Operational Procedures in place and that will be described in the related document. KPI5 is defined as: KPI.D6.4.1h = Cwi Cwo (MW)
KPI.D6.4.2h = (Cwi Cwo) / Cwo (%)
Page 52 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI KPI.D6.4Y. Yearly values The yearly value of this KPI is defined as the addition of KPI.D6.4.2h for all hours h of the year with positive gain divided by 8760 hours (average gain). Alternatively, it can be estimated using a reduced number of hourly values and appropriate weights KPI.D6.4Y = KPI.D6.4.2h / 8760 (for all h with KPI.D6.4.2h > 0) Target value (KPI5.b): 10% gain
If in one particular system state there is a need to increase the energy evacuation capacity from one zone of the grid but the Device is not available, has not been installed in a location that would allow increasing that capacity, the System Operator will use some of the following alternative solutions: 1. Re-dispatch of the conventional generation 2. Topological changes 3. Renewable production curtailment Then, three KPIs are defined for each of these alternative measures: KPI.D6.5.1 = Cost of the re-dispatch of conventional generation () KPI.D6.5.2 = Number of realized switching operations (n) KPI.D6.5.3 = MWh of renewable generation curtailed (MWh) Despite this KPIs are not directly related with the demo performance they will provide an essential input for WP 15 and 16 subsequent assessments so they have been kept but assuming that no target values can be ex ante considered. KPI.D6.5Y. Annual values The yearly values of the indicators KPI.D6.5.1, KPI.D6.5.2 y KPI.D6.5.3 are obtained respectively by the addition of their 8760 hourly values of the year. Alternatively, they can be estimated using a reduced number of values of the hourly values and appropriate weights
Indicator KPI.D6.6: Cost and profitabilityKPI6 is the annual cost of the Device. The total cost of the installation will be estimated and it will be annualised using appropriate accounting techniques. The O&M costs will be added. KPI.D6.6 = Annual cost of the Device Besides the operational alternative solutions, there will be alternative planning solutions, potentially more efficient in the long run. The annual cost of the potential planning alternative solutions that might exist (for example the repowering of a transmission line or the construction of a new one) will be evaluated and the profitability of the proposed system will then be estimated by comparing both costs although it has to be taken into account that being very different solutions, a complete comparison cannot be made in terms of costs only. Target value: 30% of annual cost reduction www.twenties-project.eu Page 53 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Demo 6 FLEXGRID KPIs Summary table
KPI
KPI.D6.1 KPI.D6.2Y KPI.D6.3 KPI.D6.4Y KPI.D6.5.1 KPI.D6.5.2 KPI.D6.5.3 KPI.D6.6
Description Correlation between RTTR and Wind Generation Line Capacity Gain obtained by using RTTR or SRTTR (MVA or %) Errors in the forecast of the Thermal Rating Capacity Gain due to the use of the Device
Target Values KPI.D6.1 = 1 KPI.D6.2Y >= 115% KPI.D6.3 <= 35% KPI.D6.4Y >= 110%
Units # % % %
Cost of the re-dispatch of conventional generation Number of realized switching operations Renewable generation curtailed Cost and profitability 30% of Cost Reduction %
Page 54 of 102
2.7 WP #17 OFFSHORE BARRIERS

The WP outlines practices and legislative initiatives for simplifying and shortening the period of licensing of offshore interconnectors with a transnational set-up. The first phase investigates current challenges and weaknesses as being faced in a series of ongoing interconnector projects and as being faced by TSOs across Northern Europe. The second phase analyse optimised practices for organising and executing the licensing process based on a few case projects and their licensing regimes. The special conditions are addressed to interconnectors using new technology (i.e. VSC technology and potential wind park link up). As a result a set of best practices for interconnector licensing are drafted and recommendations are proposed on optimising (from project development and environmental perspectives) the European legislative regimes
2.7.1.- Objectives, impacts and barriers The objectives are:

-
Current practices of offshore interconnector licensing established The challenge of licensing innovative interconnectors (VSC technology with potential wind park link up) is outlined Current and best practices outlined for interconnectors through third countries Best practices drafted for TSO organisation and the licensing procedures established Themes for improvement of national and EU legislation identified with the view of strengthening predictability and simplification
Expected Impact As a results of the WP European TSOs will be given a comprehensive understanding of the national and regional approaches to licensing of offshore interconnectors on. In turn European TSO will be provided with tools for simplifying the licensing process and strengthening the interaction with the competent regional and national authorities. Finally legislators and authorities are provided with input from the practitioners' point of view on improving legislation and procedures. As an outcome the input is reduced for licensing of interconnectors in terms of time and man power. This leads to more interconnectors being established and in turn faster and cheaper development of the pan-European transmission grid, which contributes to the integration of more wind energy.
Barriers The WP outlines practices and legislative initiatives for simplifying and shortening the period of licensing of offshore interconnectors with a transnational set-up. First phase investigates current challenges and weaknesses as being faced in a series of ongoing interconnector projects and as being faced by TSOs across Northern Europe. Second phase analyse optimised practices for organising and executing the licensing process based on a few case projects and their licensing regimes. The special conditions are addressed of interconnectors using new technology (i.e. VSC www.twenties-project.eu Page 55 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI technology and potential wind park link up). As a result a set of best practices for interconnector licensing are drafted and recommendations are proposed on optimising (from project development and environmental perspectives) the European legislative regimes
2.7.2.- Off-shore barriers KPIs Result level KPIs: Interconnector projects are applying improved measures (best practices) reducing 20% of costs and time of licensing - Improvements are targeting 30% of the typical measures for licensing offshore interconnectors.
-
Impact level KPIs: National and EU legislation and procedures are customized to licensing of offshore interconnector. Dedicated procedures are drafted for North sea and partly Baltic Sea countries - Predictable licensing of offshore grids ease the decision making process and in turn realisation of networks in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea.
-
Planning of offshore interconnector grids are based optimised and documented licensing estimates which in turn reduces the time of realising strategies (ENTSO E) by 20% for offshore grids in the Baltic Sea and the North Sea systems
WP 17 KPIs Summary:
Code
KPI
Description Interconnector projects applying improved measures (best practices) would have got a 20% reduction of costs and time of licensing Improvements (best practices) are targeting 30% of the typical measures (number of permits and consents by competent authorities) for new licensing offshore interconnectors.
Target Values 20% of reduction in cost and time
Units
KPI.WP17.1
Improvements in future interconnector projects efficiency
KPI.WP17.2
Improvements in future interconnector projectseffectiveness
30% of measures
Page 56 of 102
PROJECT KPIS
3.1 KPIS FOR ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT

General comments 1. In many of the next KPIs, the term default case is used to describe the situations in which no changes are introduced in the system. This is because the impact analyses will be performed comparing the obtained results assuming that the new control, equipments, etc. tested in the demos are widely generalised in the system, with which no changes are made, i.e. with the default case. 2. The establishment of a target value for these KPIs is not direct, and in most cases it is impossible as the purpose of the WP15 is to assess the economic impact (unknown in advance and without an a priori preferred value). 3.1.1.- Task Force 1 KPI.15.TF1.1: Cost savings in the Spanish system where wind power generators are able to control their active power and to provide frequency control: [Euro/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2013 and prospective analysis for future scenarios up to 2020. KPI.15.TF1.2: Additional economic benefit, compared with the default case, for a wind power producer participating in the Spanish secondary reserve market: [Euro/year/Installed MW] KPI.15.TF1.3: Energy losses avoided thanks to the voltage control in wind farms (and clusters): [GWh/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2013 and prospective analysis for future scenarios up to 2020. KPI.15.TF1.4: Economic value of the losses avoided thanks to the voltage control in wind farms (and clusters): [Euro/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2013 and prospective analysis for future scenarios up to 2020. KPI.15.TF1.5: CO2 emissions avoided in the Spanish system with respect the default case due to the new services provided by wind power generators: [tonne CO2/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2013 and prospective analysis for future scenarios up to 2020. KPI.15.TF1.6: Additional wind energy that could be generated in the Spanish system thanks to the new capabilities tested in Demo 1. [GWh/year] KPI.15.TF1.7: Marginal (operating) costs for providing and utilizing the services, as defined in the Demo 2 DERINT KPIs, from the VPP within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario in Denmark Service/Production Description 1 2 3 4 5 MW range MWh range Mvar range Mvarh range CO2 production range Cost Measurement /MW range /MWh range /Mvar range /Mvarh range Ton range (with associated cost in )
Page 57 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI KPI.15.TF1.8: Existing approaches for providing the services, as defined in the Demo 2 DERINT KPIs, in Denmark / What are the marginal (operating) costs within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario for providing these services? For each existing approach the following measurements/calculations will be made: Service/Production Description 1 2 3 4 5 MW range MWh range Mvar range Mvarh range CO2 production range Cost/Production Measurement /MW range /MWh range /Mvar range /Mvarh range Ton range (with associated cost in )
KPI.15.TF1.9: Marginal (operating) cost benefit of the VPP when providing the services within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario in comparison with the existing approaches in Denmark This will be measured in [] and [tons of CO2 ] reduction/increase for each of the services provided.
3.1.2.- Task Force 2 KPI.15.TF2.1: Amount of offshore renewable energy that could be securely transmitted by the new HVDC network, [GWh/year] KPI.15.TF2.2: Ratio between the expected benefit to the system for integrating this energy from of offshore renewable power in the system, and the expected incurred cost to deploy the new components, [Euro / Euro]. KPI.15.TF2.3: CO2 emissions that could be avoided in Europe 2020 due to this offshore renewable power, [tonne CO2/year]. KPI.15.TF2.4: Reduced reserve requirement to operate the Danish 2020 and 2030 power system securely in storm situations [MW. This will be calculated as the difference between the expected requirements with and without the actions demonstrated in Demo 4
3.1.3.- Task Force 3 KPI.15.TF3.1: Gain in transfer capacities (between the countries in the Central Western Europe area) with network flexibility with respect to the reference case [%/border] and [MW/border] KPI.15.TF3.2: Expected increase in net transfer capacities (between the countries in the Central Western Europe area) with network flexibility with respect to the reference case [%/border] and [MW/border] KPI.15.TF3.3: Extra amount of wind generation that network operation flexibility allows to be transmitted [GWh/year] and reduction of wind curtailment [%] with respect the default case. KPI.15.TF3.4: Economic value (benefits minus costs) at a central European level of increasing the network operation flexibility, [Euro/year]
Page 58 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI KPI.15.TF3.5: Impact on the market shares of the conventional generation technologies in the central European countries [GWh/year/(technology & country)], and in the cross-border interchanges [GWh/year/border] KPI.15.TF3.6: CO2 emissions that could be avoided at a central European level in 2020 due to this network operation flexibility, [tonne CO2/year]. KPI.15.TF3.7: Potential wind power integration increase in the Spanish system obtained by identifying the latent capacity of the network using Real Time Thermal Rating (RTTR), and by operating the line at maximum capacity by means of Overload Line Controllers (OLC), [GWh/year]. KPI.15.TF3.8: Economic impact (benefits and costs) of scaling-up the RTTR and the OLC in the Spanish power system (the deferral of network investment and lines re-powering, renewable generation increase as the system can accommodate larger amounts of wind power, etc.), [Euro/year]
3.2 KPIS FOR EU WIDE INTEGRATING ASSESSMENT

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 work complements the analysis of the economic impact that the demonstrations have on a national level in the countries where they are performed. The basic 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 KPIs listed below have been selected to facilitate the EU assessment by replication of task force #1, task force #2, but focusing on offshore wind and hydro, and with task force #3. The work is brokedown into tasks and more specific sub-tasks, which all relate to specific demonstrations and task forces as illustrated in Figure 12: Link between WP16 subtasks and the 6 demonstrations and 3 task forces .
Page 59 of 102
TF 1 system services Demo 1

WP services
TF 2 of f shore wind Demo 3

DC grid
TF 3 f lexible grid Demo 5

Netflex
Demo 2
VPP
Demo 4
Storm management
Demo 6
FLEXGRID
Task 16.1
1. Portability to Germany 2. WP balancing and frequency control services to Gernan market 3. Do. to a combined market (Germany, France, Benelux) 4.WP participation to voltage control in the German system 5. VPP model applied to German and Spanish systems
Task 16.2
1. North European 2020 offshore wind power variability 2. Hydro potential and barriers (Nordic and Alps) 3. Grid restriction studies (Nordic and Cent. EU to Alps) 4. Economic impact study (pan-European)
Task 16.3
1. Review of EWIS and Tradewind 2. Analysis to make demo 5 and demo 6 impact quantitative
WP 16 EU wide integrating assessment of demonstration replication potential
Figure12:LinkbetweenWP16subtasksandthe6demonstrationsand3taskforces
The following specific objectives of the subtasks in WP16 have been identified: Task-force 1: The focus of task 16.1 replication of task force #1 is of demo 1 and demo 2 in the German system, which is a very large system in European context, and characterised by a large wind generation capacity supplemented by other renewable energies such as photovoltaic and biogas plants which also play an important role. As supplement to replication in Germany, replication of demo 1 in a combined Germany-France-Benelux market and replication of demo 2 in Spain will be studied. National regulatory and market barriers will be analysed and the economics of the solutions assessed. The replication studies have the following more detailed objectives: Assess the economic impact for the German market where wind power generators are able to control their active power and to provide frequency control according to the results of demo 1 (T16.1.1). Assess the technical impact on the power system at the scale of Germany, France and Benelux where wind power generators are able to control their active power and to provide frequency control, and economic impact for French system according to the results of demo 1 (T16.1.2). Assess the economic benefit for the German system related with the provision of voltagecontrol by wind farms and wind farm clusters (T16.1.3). Assess the economic impact for the German and Spanish systems in case of an applying of the VPP concept of demo 2 (T16.1.4).
Page 60 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Task-force 2: Assess the North European offshore wind power variability with and without coordinated storm control for 2020 and 2030 cases (T16.2.1). Assess the spinning reserve requirements for handling forecast errors on North European offshore wind power with and without coordinated storm control for 2020 and 2030 cases (T16.2.1). Assess the possible increase of hydro power generation capacity in the Nordic system (T16.2.2). Assess the possible capacity for pumped hydro in the Nordic system (T16.2.2). Assess the potential contribution of the alpine hydro capacity to the large-scale integration of wind power in northern Europe (T16.2.2). Assess frequency deviations in the Nordic and Central European synchronous systems respectively due to offshore wind power variability, with and without coordinated storm control (T16.2.3). Suggest new transmission capacity that enables more use of hydro for balancing wind. Assess the operational costs in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 assuming the assessed spinning reserves with and without new storm control (T16.2.3, T16.2.4). Assess the CO2 emissions in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 assuming the assessed spinning reserves with and without new storm control (T16.2.4).
Task-force 3: Assess the economic impact (benefits and costs) at a European level of increasing the network operation flexibility applying demo 5 and demo 6 technologies to optimise the capacity of the existing transmission system (T16.3). Assess the CO2 emissions that could be avoided at European level in 2020 due to this network operation flexibility (T16.3).
Before going through the KPIs list two final comments should be taken into consideration: 3. In many of the next KPIs, the term reference case is used to describe situations in which no changes are introduced in the system. This is because the impact analyses will be performed comparing the obtained results assuming that the new control, equipments, etc. tested in the demos are widely generalised in the system, with which no changes are made, i.e. with the reference case. 4. The establishment of a target value for these KPIs is not direct, and in most cases it is impossible as the purpose of the WP16 is to assess the economic impact (unknown in advance and without an a priori preferred value).
Page 61 of 102
3.2.1.- Project level KPI.16.P1: Potential reduction in operational costs in the European power system by 2020 utilising the solutions demonstrated in TWENTIES [Euro/year] KPI.16.P2: Potential reduction in investment costs in the European power system by 2020 utilising the solutions demonstrated in TWENTIES [Euro/year]. KPI.16.P3: Potential reduction of CO2 in the European power system by 2020 utilising the solutions demonstrated in TWENTIES [tonnes CO2/year] KPI.16.P4: Reduction in incremental cost of wind power by using all the techniques demonstrated in TWENTIES [Euro / MW].
3.2.2.- Task Force 1: KPI.16.TF1.1: Cost savings in the German system where wind power generators are able to control their active power and to provide frequency control: [Euro/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2011 and future scenarios. KPI.16.TF1.2: Quantified estimation of the impact on the power systems where wind power generators are able to control their active power and to provide frequency control: o [MW] applicable reserve allocation on wind generation over the France-BeneluxGermany area, [Euro/year] cost reduction in France for future scenarios up to 2020..
KPI.16.TF1.3: Cost savings in the German system thanks to the voltage control in wind farms (and clusters): [/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2011 and for future scenarios. KPI.16.TF1.4: Marginal (operating) costs for providing and utilizing the services, as defined in the Demo 2 DERINT KPIs, from the VPP within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario in Germany Service/Production Description 1 2 3 4 5 MW range MWh range Mvar range Mvarh range CO2 production range Cost Measurement /MW range /MWh range /Mvar range /Mvarh range Ton range (with associated cost in )
Page 62 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI KPI.16.TF1.5: Existing approaches for providing the services, as defined in the Demo 2 DERINT KPIs, in Germany / What are the marginal (operating) costs within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario for providing these services? For each existing approach the following measurements/calculations will be made: Service/Production Description 1 2 3 4 5 MW range MWh range Mvar range Mvarh range CO2 production range Cost/Production Measurement /MW range /MWh range /Mvar range /Mvarh range Ton range (with associated cost in )
KPI.16.TF1.6: Marginal (operating) cost benefit of the VPP when providing the services within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario in comparison with the existing approaches in Germany. This will be measured in [] and [tons of CO2 ] reduction/increase for each of the services provided. KPI.16.TF1.7: Economic impact of a applying the VPP concept [Euro/year] in 2011 and for future scenarios. KPI.16.TF1.8: CO2 emissions avoided in the German system due to the new services provided by wind power generators and virtual power plants: [tonne CO2/year] for installed capacity in 2011 and for future scenarios
3.2.3. - Task Force 2: KPI.16.TF2.1: Reduction in worst case forecast errors in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 with new storm control compared to old storm control [MW]. KPI.16.TF2.2: Reduction in the need for spinning reserves in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 with new storm control compared to old storm control [MW * hours/year]. KPI.16.TF2.3: Increased wind power production with the new storm control compared to the old storm control. KPI.16.TF2.4: Potential for increased hydro power generation capacity in the Nordic synchronous system by 2020 and 2030[MW]. KPI.16.TF2.5: Economic benefit in the European power system by 2020, utilising the potential contribution of added HVDC connections and added Nordic hydro capacity, to the large-scale integration of wind power in northern Europe [Euro/year].
Page 63 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI KPI.16.TF2.6: Reduction in the needed transmission capacity if an offshore grid combines wind farm grid connections with area interconnectors, under the condition of optimal use of Nordic hydro [kmMW]. KPI.16.TF2.7: Potential alpine hydro capacity with 2020 time horizon [MW]. KPI.16.TF2.8: Economic benefit in the European power system by 2020 utilising the potential contribution of the European grid and alpine hydro capacity to the large-scale integration of wind power in northern Europe [Euro/year] (T16.2.2). KPI.16.TF2.9: CO2 emission benefit in the European power system by 2020 utilising the potential contribution of the European grid and alpine hydro capacity to the large-scale integration of wind power in northern Europe [tonnes CO2/year] (T16.2.2). KPI.16.TF2.10: Reduction in operational costs in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 assuming new storm control and recommended grid reinforcement to utilise hydro in Nordic system and the Alps, compared to old storm control and only already planned grid development [Euro/year]. KPI.16.TF2.11: Reduction in CO2 emissions in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 assuming new storm control and recommended grid reinforcements to utilise hydro in Nordic system and the Alps, compared to old storm control and only already planned grid development [tonne CO2/year].
3.2.4.- Task Force 3: KPI.16.TF3.1: Potential reduction in operational costs at the European level of increasing the network operation flexibility by applying demo 5 and demo 6 technologies to optimise the capacity of the existing transmission system [Euro/year]. KPI.16.TF3.2: Investment costs at the European level of increasing the network operation flexibility by applying demo 5 and demo 6 technologies to optimise the capacity of the existing transmission system [Euro]. KPI.16.TF3.3: Potential reduction of CO2 emission at the European level of increasing the network operation flexibility by applying demo 5 and demo 6 technologies to optimise the capacity of the existing transmission system [tonnes CO2/year].
Page 64 of 102
TOOLS AND METHODOLOGIES FOR IMPACT ASSESSMENT
In this section it will be described for each DEMO how their outputs are going to be used for Project and Task Force KPIs calculation in terms of methodologies, data requirements, inputs/outputs among the different involved partners, a detailed description of the tools and models to be used and the limitations of each assessment. Due to the specific characteristics of each Demo different tools (ROM Model, PSS/E, ANTARES, CorWind, Continental, WILMAR, etc) and level of detail in power system data will be used, however the conceptual framework of the impact assessment is harmonised in order to ensure the coherence and compatibilitty of the evaluation of results from the different Demos. This conceptual framework comprises the following five steps: a) Definition of the relevant national and European scenarios for the base case (do nothing) in 2020 and in some Demos also for 2030. b) Adaptation of the comon scenarios to the specific requirements of each tool and physical phenomena that will be evaluated. c) Assessment of the technical effectiveness of the different measured proposed as result of the Demo outcomes by simulating the operation of the system with and without the new features tested in the demonstration, and comparing the results. This assessment must provide information regarding investment in grid or generation facilities that can be delayed or avoided thanks to the new technological solutions provided within each demo and the increase in the amount of wind power that the system will be able to cope without jeopardizing the system security, or reduction of active power losses in the grid. d) Translate the conclussions of the technical assessment into financial resources. The economic aspects of network reliability and controllability, as well as avoided CO2 emissions will be also taken into consideration e) Economic assessment must consider the gain in welfare for the whole European society but also the direct impact on involved market actors (in this case mainly Wind farm promoters and Grid operators)
4.1 ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE DEMONSTRATIONS, BARRIERS TOWARDS SCALING UP AND

SOLUTIONS
4.1.1.- DEMO #1 System services provided by wind farms (SYSERWIND) Active Power Control test Once the Demo 1 has proven that it is possible to provide active-power regulation, it is necessary to assess the economic impact that it would have if the new control algorithms were installed. This assessment will be limited to the Spanish market, and it will be performed under two different perspectives: 1. From the perspective of a wind power producer as a market participant that needs to assess whether installing the new controllers is economically profitable of not. This assessment requires www.twenties-project.eu Page 65 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI quantifying the expected loss of the wind generation that is spilled in order to keep upward reserve, plus the additional incomes for selling this ancillary service to the TSO. This assessment should take into account the possible effect on prices (both energy and reserve) due to massive participation of wind producers in the reserve market. Marginally, the effect of the participation of WG in the secondary market would produce an increase in the energy price of the daily market and a decrease in the secondary reserve market. However, as the WG participation in the ancillary services market would boost the WG share. In the end daily market prices would also decrease. To be able to provide ancillary services WG has to improve the very short term forecasts. This improvement in the WG forecasting error should decrease the prices in all the markets and that represents an additional benefit to be credited to this demo. 2. From the perspective of the whole system, trying to capture not only the impact at the end of the project (2013 and 2016), but also during the posterior years up to 2020. The demo is going to carry out a test to show that wind power generators are able to provide secondary reserve, i.e., to receive signals from the AGC control to increase/decrease the output power. This reserve from wind resources could be helpful for operating the system. However, within the time framework related to the secondary reserve (it must be provided from 20 seconds to 15 minutes), it seems that the need for extra reserve is not the critical issue. Even in a scenario of larger wind power penetration, conventional hydro and thermal units would be able to provide the required secondary reserve to absorb the variability of intermittent generation. What concerns the operator is the need of having quick response reserve (such as tertiary reserve in the Spanish market) available for being prepared against a sudden decrease (or increase) of wind generation that in a few hours (3 or 4 for instance) can have large variations. The demo will show that given that there is wind, it would be possible to control the output power. So, this fact would also be true for a larger temporal horizon and therefore, the forecast accuracy (or how to deal with the apparently intrinsic prediction error) becomes crucial. From the perspective of the system, the methodology that will be followed to assess the economic impact will be based on the use of model ROM [Ramos et al., 2009]2. The ROM model determines the hourly operation of the system for every next day of the year taking into account the load balance and the operation reserve requirement. After the planning process some unexpected events may occur. There can be forced failures of thermal units or some forecasted wind generation errors may happen. These events are considered in the real time simulation of the system operation. The sequential decision process represents the real mechanisms used for operating the system. In particular the model will be used to simulate the operation of the whole system without active power regulation from wind generation, and after that, with the capability of active power regulation from wind generation. As a difference between both cases, the economic contribution of active power regulation will be obtained. The steps that will be followed are: Modelling the effect of active power regulation of wind generation in the day-ahead market. The forecasted energy for wind generation at market clearing time can be split between the energy to be sold in the daily market and that offered to the secondary reserve market. An hourly percentage is used to assign this separation between markets in the day D-1 planning stage. When wind generation forecasting errors happen they are split by the same proportion and other reserve measures have to be deployed to update the corresponding system operation. Different
A. Ramos, K. Dietrich, J.M. Latorre, L. Olmos, I.J. Prez-Arriaga Sequential Stochastic Unit Commitment for Large-Scale Integration of RES and Emerging Technologies 20th International Symposium of Mathematical Programming (ISMP) Chicago, IL, USA August 2009
Page 66 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI wind generation strategies can be tried by changing the percentage between offers in daily and secondary reserve markets. ROM model will be adapted and used to determine the technical and economic impact on the electric system.
Reactive Power Control Demo Regarding voltage control, the capabilities of wind farms to provide voltage to the transmission grid control will be assessed. The KPIs associated within the demonstration will assess whether wind farms can cooperate in the voltage control or not. From an economic point of view, the possibility of wind farms to providing voltage control can result in the reduction of active power losses within the distribution network that connect wind parks to the transmission grid. The methodology proposed to assess the economic impact of the provision of voltage control of wind farms consists in evaluating the annual losses reduction of typical wind farms when the wind farm does not provide voltage control (zero reactive injection), and when wind farms provide reactive power to cooperate in maintaining a adequate voltage profile in the transmission network. The annual losses reduction will be evaluated at the mean annual daily market price of energy. A statistical model of wind velocity based on Weibull distributions will be used to build power system scenarios. The optimal power flow of the well known power system simulator PSSE will be run to optimize active power losses in order to compute the active power losses reduction when wind farms are able to provide voltage control..
4.1.2.- DEMO #2 Large scale VPP integration (DERINT) In order to carry out the economic impact assessment of DEMO 2 several KPIs has been defined according to the following: It is important to keep in mind the various combinations of service demand (i.e. what customers are requesting), technical limits (i.e. physical limits of the generating fleet), regulations (i.e. grid codes) as well as the markets which either exist or must be proposed in this work package. The comparisons, which must be made within very distinct paradigms, can be clearly seen in the figure below.
Page 67 of 102
Legend = Point of departure
Today
Ta sk Ta sk & 15.3 15 .4 .3
= Analyses of existing systems
Future
WP10
15 .4 .3 /4 /5 Ta sk s Ta sk A re ll ta le sk va s nt Ta sk s s 1 & 5.4 .2 16 /5 .1 .1 /5 Ta sk
Denmark
Demand Technical Regulations Markets
WP15
WP16
Ta sk Ta sk & 15.2 15 .4 .2
WP16
Spain
WP15/16
WP15/16
Alternative
A re ll ta le sk va s nt
WP4/15/16
WP4/15/16
Figure13:Matrixofscenariosforsupplyinggridservicestodayandinthefuture
Figure 13 illustrates the methodology taken in Demo 2 DERINT and to be used in WP15. The point of departure is the results and experiences gained from the demonstration in Denmark. The results aligned with analysis and research from the current German market, the current Spanish market and future markets (named alternatives) will provide input to the overall assessment and analysis (WP4) and demonstrations and results (WP10) from Demo 2. KPI 15.3.1 (Marginal (operating) costs for providing and utilizing the services, as defined in the Demo 2 DERINT KPIs, from the VPP within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario in Denmark) methodology: It will be made the economic comparisons of what is possible with the VPP approach within the existing and future technical/market/regulatory frameworks. Inputs: Energinet.dk: o In depth information concerning the market and regulatory infrastructure in Denmark (e.g. for frequency control: minimum offer, tender period, time slots, time of activation, ; market structure: gate closure etc ; feed-in tariff for renewable energy, )
Page 68 of 102
16 .1 .*
Germany
Ta sk
16 .1 .*
Project Objectives & KPI The development of new market and regulatory scenarios which would more appropriately accommodate the VPP. How much energy is required per annum to supply consumers in Denmark (currently and in the future)? How much active and reactive power is currently needed on average to stabilize the gird? Where is the reactive power needed (reactive power could be more locally produced with a widespread VPP implementation when compared with the status quo)?
KPI 15.3.2 ( Existing approaches for providing the services, as defined in the Demo 2 DERINT KPIs, in Denmark / Marginal (operating) costs within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario for providing these services) methodology: The competing approaches are not necessarily from a single source but will most probably be a combined effort from various sources as per the status quo. For this part of the investigation to be made, the following information is required: From DONG Energy: o The current competing approaches in Denmark and the costs for providing them within the existing market and regulatory framework.
From Ris DTU: o The capabilities and costs of providing different types of reserve power within the competing approaches need to be defined. The Wilmar Joint Market Model3 will be used to assess operation costs and emissions. The Wilmar model will be run with each set of capabilities and costs, and system operational costs, prices on different reserve markets, and CO2 emissions will be calculated with the Wilmar model simulation results. Hence the system benefits of different approaches will be compared.
KPI 15.3.3 (Marginal (operating) cost benefit of the VPP when providing the services within each demand/technical/regulation/market scenario in comparison with the existing approaches in Denmark) methodology: For this part of the investigation to be made, the following information is required: Output from KPIs 15.3.2 and 15.3.3
P. Meibom, H. V. Larsen, R. Barth, H. Brand, C. Weber, O. Voll. Wilmar Joint Market Model Documentation. Rs R-1552(EN). January 2006.
Page 69 of 102
4.1.3.- DEMO #3Technical specifications towards offshore HVDC networks (DC GRID) The economic impact assessment of DEMO 3 will be carried out both in WP5 (drivers to HVDC offshore grids) as well as in WP15 (Impact analysis of developing offshore HVDC networks in a context of increasing offshore wind generation) by using some inputs from the first one. As a result of the whole analysis it is anticipated that the economic benefits of introducing offshore HVDC networks will be examined on two levels. At a high level the relative nodal marginal cost and level of investment in conventional generating plant will be examined in the presence and in the absence of an HVDC network, under a number of potential network configurations. The relative economic benefits of the introduction of the HVDC grid will be compared with the estimated total investment and operating costs associated with the network configurations proposed. At a more detailed level, the economic aspects of network reliability and controllability will be explored. A reliability and network utilisation assessment will be performed and evaluated according to the following network characteristics: Multi-terminal or point-to-point Presence of complex meshing Introduction of DC breakers Introduction of supplementary controls
The analyses will be achieved through the application of the ANTARES model (in WP5) which has the ability to perform both adequacy and economic assessments of electricity systems. This model was developed by RTE to tackle two subjects of growing concern for TSOs, especially in the light of the responsibilities that the 3rd energy package puts on them at the prospective stage: on the one hand, assessment of the fundamentals of the economic behavior of the power system (actual contribution of each kind of generation technology to the energy mix, savings in fuel costs to expect from grid reinforcements, etc.) ; on the other hand, assessment of the risk of power shortage that the system may have to face if it were to meet adverse generation conditions (low availability of thermal plants, windless episode, draught, etc.) at times of very high demand (e.g. winter cold spell during week-days). The first field of application of ANTARES is therefore market-oriented, while the latter is more pertaining to regulatory concerns (Security of Supply -SoS). Being a Monte-Carlo sequential simulator, the way the tool proceeds is to go through a large number of yearly scenarios made of consistent sets of 8760-hour time-series (wind power, availability of thermal plants, level of demand, etc.), while determining the overall least-cost trajectory for the whole interconnected system (unit commitment and optimal dispatch for every generation park). The simulation process involves therefore two very different stages: a) Generation of Time-series for all of the variables of the techno-economic problem, with a resolution of one hour. b) Determination of the economic optimum for the whole system, with a resolution of one hour and within a time-frame of one day to one week. Unlike that of thermal power plants availability (obtained through a classical two-state Markovian model), the generation of Time-series for intermittent generation relies on the use of correlated diffusion processes. The parameters of the stochastic differential equation defining each process are set so as to make it stationary, with a given desired marginal law and exponential autocorrelation function. For the purpose of this European project studies, the capabilities of the built-in Time-series generator of ANTARES have been extended so as to make it possible to simulate stationary processes whose marginal law is of the Weibull type, which is widely acknowledged as a fitting www.twenties-project.eu Page 70 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI distribution for the modulus of wind speed in many locations and heights. Once generated, such wind speed times-series may be rightly converted into wind power time-series, using the ad hoc diagrams of the local machines. Within the project framework it will be possible to put these simulation capabilities at work on manyfold scenarios aiming at assessing the economic synergies between off-shore DC grid development, off-shore wind generation and interconnected on-shore systems. The matter of the modeling of the spatial correlations between the different variables of the problem (especially those of the different interconnected wind fields) and of their influence on the economic behavior of the system is likely to be a cornerstone of the studies, from which both theoretical and practical results of interest are expected.
4.1.4.- DEMO #4 - Offshore wind farm management under stormy conditions (STORM MANAGEMENT)
KPI.15.TF2.4: Reduced reserve requirement to operate the Danish 2020 and 2030 power system securely in storm situations [MW. This will be calculated as the difference between the expected requirements with and without the actions demonstrated in Demo 4. This KPI reflects the impact assessment of Demo 4 for the Danish system. The first task to be carried out is to upscale the expected offshore wind power storm response from Horns Rev 2 to the 3-4 GW offshore wind power planned in Denmark. This will be done by means of simulation using Ris CorWind4 simulation software. CorWind can simulate wind power variability over large areas, taking into account the wind speed correlation, both in time and space, between different wind farms. The response of the system with 3 GW offshore wind power and the present storm control during the passage of a storm front will be simulated and used as reference case. In order to assess the increase in the amount of wind power that the system will be able to cope with in storm situations, the simulations will be repeated using the storm controller developed and demonstrated in Demo 4. Based on extensive sets of simulations, the average number of storms per year and the average storm duration will be calculated as reliability indexes for the offshore wind power. The impact of the new storm management demonstrated Demo 4 on the secure operation of the Danish power system in 2020 and 2030 will be assessed. This impact will be quantified in terms of reserves needed for the secure operation of the power system and it will be calculated as the difference between the expected reserves required with and without the actions demonstrated in Demo 4. The definition of the reserves will be similar to the one used in Srensen and all5. The main focus will be on short term automatic reserves (time horizon 15 min), but the needed reserves on shorter and longer time scales will also be studied
Srensen, P., Pinson, P., Cutululis, N.A., Madsen, H., Jensen, L.E., Hjerrild, J., Donovan, M.H., ViguerasRodriguez, A., "Power Fluctuations from Large Wind Farms", Ris-R-1711(EN), 2009; http://orbit.dtu.dk/getResource?recordId=248594&objectId=1&versionId=1
5
Srensen, P., Cutululis, N.A., Vigueras - Rodriguez, A., Jensen, L., Hjerrild, J., Donovan, Madsen, H. "Modeling and Validation of Power Fluctuations from Large Wind Farms", IEEE Trans on Power Systems, 22(3): 958-965, 2007
Page 71 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI 4.1.5.- DEMO #5 Network enhanced flexibility (NETFLEX)
KPIs The added value of the demonstrated NETFLEX (NETwork enhanced FLEXibility: Coordination of Flow Control Devices with Dynamic Line Rating while monitoring system stability) needs to be assessed in WP15. In particular, the task 15.7 will try to assess the impact of Demonstration #5 in CORESO under the joint collaboration between ELIA and EDF. This assessment will be quantified by the next KPIs (numeration pending to update): KPI.15.TF3.1: Gain in transfer capacities (between the countries in the Central Western Europe area) with network flexibility with respect to the reference case [%/border] and [MW/border] KPI.15.TF3.2: Expected increase in net transfer capacities (between the countries in the Central Western Europe area) with network flexibility with respect to the reference case [%/border] and [MW/border] KPI.15.TF3.3: Extra amount of wind generation that network operation flexibility allows to be transmitted [GWh/year] and reduction of wind curtailment [%] with respect the default case. KPI.15.TF3.4: Economic value (benefits minus costs) at a central European level of increasing the network operation flexibility, [Euro/year] KPI.15.TF3.5: Impact on the market shares of the conventional generation technologies in the central European countries [GWh/year/(technology & country)], and in the cross-border interchanges [GWh/year/border] KPI.15.TF3.6: CO2 emissions that could be avoided at a central European in 2020 due to this network operation flexibility, [tonne CO2/year].
Impact assessment methodology The joint methodology proposed by ELIA and EDF to assess these KPIs is explained hereafter: The impact of enhancing the network flexibility can be studied under two perspectives: 1) The effect within each one of the countries (or zones), and 2) The effect on the cross-border flows between different areas. Regarding the first one, the new operation of the network can lead to a better use of the available generation resources within the country. For instance, sometimes it is needed to curtail the generation of a wind farm because the transmission lines connected to it are congested. Enhanced network flexibility could reduce such curtailments, or even the installation of new wind power generators in this area delaying the need of building additional lines. Regarding the second one, increasing the cross-border capacity has an obvious positive effect. If there is less expensive generation in a given zone, the available power could be transmitted to the other inter-connected areas while more expensive or pollutant generation would decrease. In Europe, the pace of investment in wind power capacity has been different in each country. Therefore, increasing the flexibility in transfer capacities among countries will presumably facilitate using the www.twenties-project.eu Page 72 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI power generated by renewable sources in countries with an excess of power in other countries with lower penetration of renewables. The technical assessment of the impact of using Dynamic Line Rating or Phase Shifter Transformers to control the power flows, requires a detailed analysis of the whole electric power system. For a given configuration of the network, it is possible to run an OPF (optimal power flow) to determine the best way of reliably operating (voltage stability and system reliability criteria). These studies form part of the day-to-day tasks performed by the TSOs to plan and to operate the electric power systems. As ELIA and Coreso have proven models and technical data to perform these analyses covering the Central Western Europe (CWE), they will be responsible of the technical assessment. The idea is straightforward: to simulate the operation of the system with and without the new features tested in the demonstration, and to compare the results. As the effect can vary notably depending on the conditions of the network (system demand, availability of conventional generations, import-exports, etc.), it will be necessary to perform this study for a number of possible configurations representing not only the current system conditions, but also the expected ones up to 2020. Doing so the gain will be extrapolated as if the technologies were already deployed all over Europe. The first step will be to define a number of representative case-studies that will be agreed by the main players involved (TSOs of the concerned countries). The appropriate definition of these case-studies will be crucial in order to obtain robust and representative results. In particular, both the total number of new Phase Shifter Transformers and their precise location in the network may have a direct effect on the results, and therefore, they have to be carefully selected. Under different (and representative) scenarios of wind energy sources in CWE, load consumption (demand growth), and existing transmission lines, ELIA and Coreso will obtain the power flows with and without the tested network flexibility devices. This technical assessment performed by ELIA will have several outputs: 1. For the particular case of the Belgium system, which are the grid investment that can be delayed or avoided thanks to the new devices and methods tested in the demo? To answer this question, the study will estimate the economic benefits coming from the savings associated with delaying investments in new infrastructures required to integrate the same amount of wind energy in Belgium. 2. What are the observed transfer capacities and the expected Net Transfer Capacities (NTC) between the countries in the CWE with and without the new features? The values of the NTC could vary trough the year and they could depend on the system conditions. After this step, the economic assessment will be performed by EDF taking as input data the NTC values obtained previously. This economic assessment will be carried out using a model that simulates the European electricity market based on a description of economic fundamentals. In the model, several zones for offer/demand are described (typically, one for each country). The different zones are interconnected using Net Transfer Capacities (NTC). The model simulates an hourly dispatch in a simplified way: the demand and the supply bids are estimated for each zone according to the costs of the different generators and the model matches them hour by hour, by minimising the total generation cost. This model does not consider the network (except for NTC). It represents each country (or region) by means of a single-node that can be connected to neighbouring areas by means of NTC that allow exchanging power among them. The model works in a two-step sequence. First it considers scenarios of various demands, variable renewable generation, generation availabilities (by taking both contingencies and maintenance) and water inflows in order to compute the monthly value of water of each reservoir as a function of the stored water level, using dynamic programming. Second the model performs the hourly matching between offer and demand by minimizing the generation cost using linear programming. The linear programming formulation does not include binary variables, and therefore, discrete decisions (such as www.twenties-project.eu Page 73 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI the start-up and the shut-down of thermal units) are not considered. Moreover, inter-temporal links such as ramp rate limits, maximum-minimum energy produced during a given time interval, etc., are not considered. Despite these simplifications, the model is able to provide a reasonable estimation of the hourly marginal cost of each area (i.e. the market clearing price, as no oligopolistic strategic bidding is assumed), and therefore, for each scenario the model produces a time series of hourly prices for the whole year and of each one of the considered zones (the matching is performed over 81 equally-likely scenarios of 52 weeks of 7 days, i.e., 8736 hours per scenario). Depending on the NTC and the amount of renewable energy sources introduced as input data, the model will lead to different prices. This can be used to determine the profitability of investing in new peaking units, such as combined cycle gas turbines, starting with an initial portfolio of generators, and updating the decisions in an iterative way. However, for the purpose of this task, the most promising feature of the model is that if the NTC increase, part of the renewable energy produced in one country will be able to be used in the other areas whenever it is economically efficient. As a consequence, benefits are expected in fuel consumption and/or generation investments. Therefore benefits can be assessed with the NTC increase for all the involved countries. These numbers will be crucial to perform the economic assessment. In addition, increasing the NTC will allow more exchanges: we can expect that in a country A, a given volume of conventional generation will be replaced by increased imports (thanks to increased NTC). Comparing to the baseline case, the amount of incremental exports in a country B could be driven by a non-conventional technology. Thus, we can expect such switches of generation thanks to increased NTC. For each technology it is possible to measure the decrease on the market share due to the new network operation. Therefore a post-processing of the results of the model will be done in order to compute the percentage of the demand that is supplied by each aggregated technology (coal, gas, nuclear, hydro, wind, etc.) in each area. Finally, another output of the model is the amount of CO2 emissions in each country for a given scenario. Introducing as input data the emission rate of each generator (tones of CO2 per MWh), the model can easily compute the amount of CO2 emitted by each generator in each area. Using this information, running the model with and without the NTC increase, it will be possible to quantify the effect on carbon emissions. Ultimately the gain in welfare will be estimated by putting all pieces together. In other words the focus will be on the value created by the technology rather than on the value captured by one or another party. 4.1.6.- DEMO #6 Improving the flexibility of the transmission grid (FLEXGRID) Wind curtailment typically occurs when there is excess electric production in an area and there is insufficient transmission capacity to move that electricity to demand centers because the lines are congested. Other reasons for wind curtailments are network stability short-circuit power concerns, inadequate active/reactive power levels, and the existence of minimum stable load of conventional generators during low demand hours. A recent report of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)6 shows the main causes of wind curtailment in many countries. In the Spanish case, Red Elctrica indicates that the existence of local grid congestions and the need to assure a feasible generation dispatch under minimum load conditions are the two main causes of wind curtailment. For instance, in 2009, 54 GWh of wind
Subcontract Report NREL/SR-550-48737: Examples of Wind Energy Curtailment Practices, Jennifer Rogers, Sari Fink, and Kevin Porter Exeter Associates, Inc. Columbia, Maryland
6
July 2010.
Page 74 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI generation was curtailed, representing about 0.15% of total wind production. In the first three months of 2010, 1% of wind production was curtailed in Spain. Demo 6 will prove that it is possible to operate the transmission network in a more flexible way by means of changing dynamically the capacity of the lines Real Time Thermal Ratings (RTTR), and by means of installing mobile Overload Line Controllers (OLC) to redirect the power flows in order to avoid line congestions. Therefore, among the several reasons for wind power curtailment, Demo 6 will be focused basically on reducing the problem of having congested lines. The assessment of the economic impact of Demo 6 will be carried out jointly by REE and by IITComillas. REE will contribute with its deep knowledge of the network, its expertise to identify representative generation scenarios, its know-how and planning tools to prepare all the plausible future system snapshots that can be needed and all the necessary input data and models needed to run the power flow studies of the Spanish system by means of the tool PSSE. IIT-Comillas will carry out a cost-benefit analysis considering not only the results of these detailed network analysis performed by REE, but also the results obtained after introducing the necessary changes in the model ROM (described in section 4.1.1 to capture the effect on the generation system due to the availability of larger capacity of the lines. To assess the effect of operating the network using RTTR and OLC, it would be necessary to perform a detailed power flow analysis with and without them, and to compare the obtained solutions (wind curtailed, dispatch of conventional generation, losses, etc.). This basic idea presents several difficulties that must be taking into account: The time dimension. The assessment should be representative, and therefore in theory it should be done for each hour of the whole range of years considered in the analysis and under very different system conditions that are subject to uncertainty. In theory, it would not be enough to analyze each hour independently, as there are many constraints that link the operation decisions of different hours. This would mean that for a particular scenario (a given set of forecasted demand, installed generation capacity (including unavailability rates), hydro, wind and PV production hypothesis, a given grid) a single probabilistic run would include the analysis of 8760 temporally coupled snapshots per year of analysis. The spatial dimension. Line congestions in a given area of the system can be originated when the local wind generation in this area exceeds a certain quantity. In that case it will be necessary to consider the spatial correlation among all the wind farms operating in such area. However, congestions can also appear in several areas of the system at the same tame. This broader scope requires to perform a global analysis, and to take into account the spatial correlation of wind generation in the whole system.
To deal with both difficulties, the proposed methodology to perform this analysis can be summarized in the next steps: 1. Define of a number of representative scenarios with a statistical characterization of the uncertain parameters in 2020. 2. Prepare a number of representative 2020 system snapshots for each scenario. 3. Perform detailed power flow analyses (PSSE), with and without RTTR/OLC for such snapshots. 4. Evaluate the gain in wind power integrated into the system due to the full scale use of RTTR/OLC devices in the system. 5. Additionally, simulate the operation of the generation-transmission system considering a less detailed representation of the network, but capturing the inter-temporal links such as the stochastic unit-commitment decisions, hydrothermal coordination, etc (model ROM). In this case, the emphasis will be done in capturing the effect of generation constraints.
Page 75 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI In the first step, the representative scenarios will consider the most precise picture for future wind power generation (installed capacity, location, etc.), and the future network planning. It will be taken into account the current delays in building new lines and the track record in former network planning fulfillments, so several future hypotheses (optimistic, pessimistic) can be studied. The statistical characterization will include the correlation studies in order to simulate in the next steps the simultaneousness between wind production and transmission capacity. The second step consists in developing the system snapshots representative of the selected scenarios. This will include the characterization of conventional and renewable generation and the demand at each node necessary to perform realistic power flows. Then, adding the planned grid, the desired snapshots will be created. The third step will be to perform a detailed power flow analysis for the selected scenarios comparing the results obtained with and without the tested RTTR/OLC. For each representative scenario, it will be possible to assess the economic savings (for instance, thanks to the expected lower wind curtailments), that will be compared with the cost of installing the new equipment (annuities of investments). Therefore, for each scenario the wind behavior will be simulated to obtain the amount of the most likely wind curtailments and finally it will be evaluated the potential reduction of them. This analysis could also give useful information about which are the most overloaded transmission lines and corridors, in which the installation of RTTR/OLC would bring more benefits compared with the associated costs. The fourth step will try to capture the effect of inter-temporal links. This will be achieved by means of running the updated version of the model ROM for the whole year, including a simplified representation of the network. This representation of the network could be just the definition of maximum capacities of the corridors between different areas (to be defined according to the experience gained in the step 3), or more sophisticated such as the consideration of the DC optimum power flow equations (i.e. neglecting the reactive power flows) in the mixed-integer linear formulation of the problem. As a result of this assessment it will be possible to answer the question of how much wind power can be integrated into the system with the use of RTTR and OLC and compare the benefits versus the costs of a system wide use of the solutions proposed in Demo 6.
4.1.7.- WP #17 Offshore barriers Lead time improvements and cost reductions: Result level: The 20% economic and time saving effects are composed by comparing de facto with WP 17 proposed measures for five completed interconnector projects in the North Sea and Baltic Sea regions. Conventional financial assessment tools are applied. Impact level: The envisaged improvement of 20% is measured by benchmarking licensing costs and durations for five interconnector projects completed in 2010 with five similar projects using the enhanced measures developed by WP 17. The 20% time and cost savings on the level of full Baltic Sea and North Sea offshore transmission systems are based on ENTSO E strategy plans. The figures of the above benchmarking will be used as reference and justification. In turn the overall economic benefits for the EU transmissions systems are estimated having year 2020 as the target. Harmonised and simplified licensing procedures: Result level: 30% of measures for offshore interconnector licensing are improved by standardised and simplified measures developed by WP 17. The measures of selected eight case interconnector projects for the North Sea and the Baltic Sea are used as reference. www.twenties-project.eu Page 76 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Impact level: The harmonisation and simplification of licensing procedures are adopted by competent authorities at regional and national levels leading to realisation of simplified and standardised offshore interconnector measures adopted by competent authorities. The effect on time and cost reductions for overall North Sea and Baltic Sea offshore networks using the ENTSO E strategies as reference.
4.2 EU WIDE INTEGRATING ASSESSMENT OF DEMONSTRATION REPLICATION POTENTIAL

4.2.1.- Project level KPI.16.P1: Potential reduction in operational costs in the European power system by 2020 utilising the solutions demonstrated in TWENTIES [Euro/year]. This will be calculated using WILMAR market model with the input data for the 2020 scenario which is available from the task forces, supplemented with cost savings assessed by the task forces. KPI.16.P2: Potential reduction investment costs in the European power system by 2020 utilising the solutions demonstrated in TWENTIES [Euro/year]. This will be calculated based on the savings assessed in the task forces. KPI.16.P3: Potential reduction of CO2 in the European power system by 2020 utilising the solutions demonstrated in TWENTIES [tonnes CO2/year] Same approach as KPI.16.P1 KPI.16.P4: Reduction in incremental cost of wind power by using all the techniques demonstrated in TWENTIES [Euro / MW]. Same approach as KPI.16.P1. The idea is then on top of the 2020 scenario simulation to increase the installed wind power incrementally, e.g. by 1%, and then use the change in operational costs to calculate the incremental cost of wind power.
4.2.2.- Task-force 1: KPI.16.TF1.1. Cost savings in the German system where wind power generators are able to control their active power and to provide frequency control: [Euro/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2011 and future scenarios. The frequency control market of Germany will be analysed and simulated how a participation of wind turbine generators can substitute more expensive service providers. KPI.16.TF1.2 Quantified estimation of the impact on the French, German and Benelux power systems in case wind power generators are able to control their active power and to provide frequency control: www.twenties-project.eu Page 77 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI [MW] applicable reserve allocation on wind generation Based on the wind generation data, the resulting contribution to frequency control supplied by wind will be assessed in the considered geographic area. This will be done according to the results of demo 1 as well as those of IWES deliverables. Estimation of the cost reduction for French power system: [Euro/year] cost reduction for future scenarios up to 2020. Firstly, scenarios of installed wind generation as well as conventional generation mix must be defined in the countries covered by the study. This task must be performed in accordance with scenarios applied to the German case. A set of data will be defined to build a model the whole generation mix over the studied countries. The calculated wind contribution to frequency control will then be taken as an input to the simulated unit commitment model. Based on the results of these simulations, an estimate of the cost variation of the resulting dispatch of generation will be assessed with respect to the reference case KPI.16.TF1.3 Cost savings in the German system thanks to the voltage control in wind farms (and clusters): [/year] for installed wind generation capacity in 2011 and for future scenarios. Alternative technologies for reactive power supply in Germany will be analysed and simulated how a participation of wind turbine generators can substitute more expensive service providers. The costs are compared with the costs of alternative provision of voltage control (e.g. conventional power plants, tap-changing transformers, capacitors, synchronous condensers, STATCOMs, SVCs etc). The analysis considers investment costs as well as operating costs based on losses in the network and the wind turbines/farms. KPI.16.TF1.4. Economic impact of applying the VPP concept [Euro/year] in 2011 and for future scenarios. Benefits of VPP operation by provision of ancillary services and market participation compared to cost estimations of the economic impact for the German situation. KPI.16.TF1.5 CO2 emissions avoided in the German system due to the new services provided by wind power generators and virtual power plants: [tonne CO2/year] for the installed capacity in 2011 and for future scenarios. Substituted energy is weighted with CO2 emission factors for conventional service providers
4.2.3.- Task-force 2: KPI.16.TF2.1. Reduction in maximum (99% percentile) wind power forecast errors in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 with new storm control compared to old storm control [MW].
Page 78 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Detailed scenarios for the offshore wind power development including 2020 and 2030 will be specified, based on existing plans and scenarios. To take properly into account the effect of geographical dispersion of the offshore wind plants in storm situations, the scenario must be more detailed than existing scenarios in locating the future wind farms geographically. Ris CorWind (in DoW denoted WPTS) software will be applied to simulate the North European offshore wind power variability with the detailed scenarios, and the wind power forecast error will be derived from this. The forecast errors in the European system will be derived based on the same way procedure which is described to derive the reserve requirements for Denmark in KPI.15.TF2.4. Thus, the statistical distribution of the forecast errors will be derived and analysed to provide the 99% percentile. Persistence will be used to emulate the forecast in the first place. This is a reasonable assumption, because we are mainly assessing forecasts on a very short time horizon (15 minutes). The project will also look at more advanced ways to emulate the forecasts, but this approach is rather complicated and risky, because it is essential to keep the correlation between the forecast errors at different locations. In other words, a more advanced approach is not necessarily better than the simple persistence approach is for the present short term study. KPI.16.TF2.2. Reduction in the need for spinning reserves in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 with new storm control compared to old storm control [MW * hours/year]. The aim is to quantify the reduction in the need for spinning reserves in the hour-ahead operation. This reduction will be calculated based on the simulated forecast errors for both new and old storm control. KPI.16.TF2.3. Increased wind power production with the new storm control compared to the old storm control. In order to quantify the increase in wind power production due to the new storm control strategies, wind power time series will be simulated, using the same wind speed input provided by CorWind, for both the old and new storm control strategies. KPI.16.TF2.4 (SINTEF) Potential for increased hydro power generation capacity in the Nordic synchronous system by 2020 and 2030[MW]. The potential hydro capability in terms of power generation rating, pumping, reservoir and ramp rates will be assessed based on realistic assumptions. KPI.16.TF2.5 (SINTEF) Economic benefit in the European power system by 2020, utilising the potential contribution of added HVDC connections and added Nordic hydro capacity, to the large-scale integration of wind power in northern Europe [Euro/year] The PSST power flow market model will be used to make cost comparisons between configurations with and without added HVDC connections and added hydro capacity in the Nordic region. KPI.16.TF2.6 (SINTEF) Reduction in the needed transmission capacity if an offshore grid combines wind farm grid connections with area interconnectors, under the condition of optimal use of Nordic hydro [kmMW]. Page 79 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI An offshore North Sea grid combining wind farm grid connections with area interconnectors in a meshed grid will be compared to a radial point-to-point grid structure. The identification of needed transmission capacity will be done by power system simulations calculating grid sensitivities using the PSST. The optimal use of hydro is the solution that yields the lowest total costs on a European level. KPI.16.TF2.7 (TenneT) Potential alpine hydro capacity with 2020 time horizon [MW]. KPI.16.TF2.8 (TenneT) Economic benefit in the European power system by 2020 utilising the potential contribution of the European grid and alpine hydro capacity to the large-scale integration of wind power in northern Europe [Euro/year] (T16.2.2). KPI.16.TF2.9 (TenneT) CO2 emission benefit in the European power system by 2020 utilising the potential contribution of the European grid and alpine hydro capacity to the large-scale integration of wind power in northern Europe [tonnes CO2/year] (T16.2.2). KPI.16.TF2.10: Reduction in operational costs in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 assuming new storm control and recommended grid reinforcement to utilise hydro in Nordic system and the Alps, compared to old storm control and only already planned grid development [Euro/year]. The WILMAR market model will be applied for the two cases 2020 and 2030 respectively, using the spinning reserves expressed in KPI.16.TF2.2 with and without demo 4 storm control, and the interconnection and hydro power capacities identified for the Nordic system and for the Alps. KPI.16.TF.2.10 relies on comparing different Wilmar model runs for 2020 and 2030. Hence setting up the Wilmar model in 2020 and 2030 will be a prerequisite for all 4 KPIs and will consists of the following steps: Case definition: define cases combining assumptions regarding magnitude and topology of offshore wind power, hydropower including pumped hydro resources and international transmission capacities for 2020 and 2030. Update the Wilmar databases with offshore wind time series, hydro potentials for the Nordic countries and the Alps and transmission grid reinforcements. Create scenario trees for wind power forecasts, load forecasts and demand for reserves for2020and2030usingtheScenarioTreetoolofWilmar. KPI.16.TF2.11: Reduction in CO2 emissions in the European power system by 2020 and 2030 assuming new storm control and recommended grid reinforcements to utilse hydro in Nordic system and the Alps, compared to old storm control and only already planned grid development [tonne CO2/year]. This KPI will be calculated based on the same WILMAR simulations as KPI.16.TF2.10, but extracting the CO2 consumptions.
Page 80 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI 4.2.4.- Task-force 3: KPI.16.TF3.1. Potential reduction in operational costs in the European power system that could be achieved by increasing the network operation flexibility by applying demo 5 and demo 6 technologies to optimise the capacity of the existing transmission system [Euro/year]. As it was stated in the DOW, it is not included in the scope of TWENTIES to carry out an exhaustive study, based on detailed network and market models, of the whole European power system in order to complete a detailed assessment of the global impact at EU level. However a number of studies have addressed this huge work and their results have pointed out grid bottlenecks and other technical constraints for massive wind power integration in the European system. For example EWIS project results show that, due to the difficulties to build new lines in Europe, the optimal use of the existing transmission capacity is a must and some of the technologies that should contribute significantly to this optimal use of the existing assets are the ones demonstrated in TF #3. 1.- The impact of task force 3 solutions and their replicability at EU level, will be assess through a critical review of the outputs and conclusions of some relevant projects such as EWIS, TRADEWIND, or even the TYNDP and analyze in depth the contribution of Demos 5 and 6 results to the resolution of the problems and technical constraints identified. This analysis is going to be complemented with direct discussion with most relevant TSOs in Europe (starting of course from the ones participating in TWENTIES) During these discussions special attention must be paid to: a) Internal Congestions 2. - Information on internal congestion costs (cost for solving technical constraints caused by transmission grid issues). Total yearly costs data should be readily available. This will be the maximum value of this KPI and a first approximation to it that could be achieved if all congestions could be avoided by using Demo 5 and Demo 6 network operating flexibility techniques. 3. - Information about the number of lines/cables which cause internal congestion. The results of the Demo 5 and 6 and the preliminary impact assessment based on critical review of above mentioned studies will be explained to these TSOs and in particular the % of total congestion costs that could be achieved at national level (task 15). An assessment of the % of total congestion costs that could be achieved by using Demo 5 and Demo 6 network operating flexibility techniques in the most relevant European countries will be done in collaboration with the relevant TSOs. b) Congestions in the interconnections 4. - Interconnection Congestion Management costs data will be collected from ENTSO-E or from the European TSOs. Total yearly costs data should be readily available. This will be the maximum value of this KPI and a first approximation to it that could be achieved if all
Page 81 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI congestions could be avoided by using the Demo 5 and 6 network operating flexibility techniques. 5. - Information about the number of lines/cables which cause congestions in the interconnections will be requested from the most relevant TSOs. The results of the Demo 5 and 6 will be explained to these TSOs and in particular the % of total congestion costs that could be achieved at national level (task 15). An assessment of the % of total congestion costs that could be achieved by using Demo 5 and Demo 6 network operating flexibility techniques in the most relevant European countries will be done in collaboration with the relevant TSOs (whether they are TWENTIES partners or not). 6.- A % of the total Internal congestion costs and a % of the total Interconnection congestion costs in Europe that could be reduced will be estimated respectively and, therefore, the value in Euro.
KPI.16.TF3.2. Investment costs at the European level of increasing the network operation flexibility by applying demo 5 and demo 6 technologies to optimise the capacity of the existing transmission system [Euro]. In the evaluation of KPI.16.TF3.1 the number of lines needing the use of RTTR techniques, the number of FACTs to be used and the number of phase-shifter transformers whose control capacity would need to be coordinated to achieve maximum use of the interconnection capacities will be estimated. KPI.16.TF3.1 will be the best estimation of the total investment costs of these elements.
KPI.16.TF3.3. Potential reduction of CO2 emission that could be achieved by increasing the network operation flexibility by applying demo 5 and demo 6 technologies to optimise the capacity of the existing transmission system [tonnes CO2/year]. The evaluation of this KPI will be done in parallel to that of KPI.16.TF3.1 but taking into account CO2 emissions from fossil fuel plants instead of costs.
Page 82 of 102
Annex 1.
DETAILED WORK PLAN PER DEMO
Demo #1. SYSERWIND
Page 83 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Demo #2. DERINT

Year Quarter Demo 2 - Master plan Management Demo Plan (WP10) R&D Plan (WP4) Reporting Deliverables 2.1 4.1 10.1 16.1 4.2 10.2 4.3 10.3 15.1 15.3 Whitepaper 2010 Q2 Q3 2011 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 2012 Q3 Q4 Q1 2013 Q2
Demo 2 workshops In total 13 meetings
Page 84 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Demo #3. DC GRID 2010

WP5
2011 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1
2012 Q2 Q3 Q4
2013 Q1
Q2
Q3
Technical coordination of WP5-WP11 T5.1 Drivers for development of offshore HVDC networks T5.2 DeliverableD5.2 5.2 Optimal operation of the AC/DC interconnected power systems T5.3 DeliverableD5.3 Local controls and protections for HVDC networks T5.4 DeliverableD5.1 5.1 Operation under normal and emergency conditions T5.5 DeliverableD5.4 5.4 5.3
Page 85 of 102
2010
WP11
2011 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1
2012 Q2 Q3 Q4
2013 Q1
Q2
Q3
DC network quantification (RT simulations)
T11.1
Real time demo preparation
T11.2
Real time demo
T11.3
DC prototype breaker specifications and prequalification
T11.4 Deliv.D11.1
DC breaker prototype development + preliminary tests 11.1
T11.5 Deliv.D11.2
Specification of tests of ALSTOM GRID prototype breaker 11.2
T11.6
Tests on ALSTOM GRID prototype DC breaker
T11.7
Deliv. D11.3 Complementary functions and / or tests 11.3
T11.8
Page 86 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Demo #4. STORM MANAGEMENT
Page 87 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Demo #5. NETFLEX

2010 2011 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 2012 Q2 Q3 Q4 2013 Q1 Q2
ID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 N E T F L E X D e m o n s tra tio n D e s ig n
Task N am e
S ta rt 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 0 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 0 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 0 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 0 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 1 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 0 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 0 0 1 /1 0 /2 0 1 0 0 1 /1 0 /2 0 1 0 0 2 /0 1 /2 0 1 2 0 1 /1 0 /2 0 1 0 0 1 /1 0 /2 0 1 0 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 1 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 1 0 3 /1 0 /2 0 1 1 0 1 /0 2 /2 0 1 2 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 1 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 1 0 2 /0 4 /2 0 1 2 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 0 0 2 /0 4 /2 0 1 2 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 1 0 3 /1 0 /2 0 1 1 0 1 /0 4 /2 0 1 0 1 5 /0 2 /2 0 1 2 0 2 /0 4 /2 0 1 2
F in is h
Q2 Q3
2 9 /0 3 /2 0 1 3 3 0 /1 2 /2 0 1 1 3 1 /0 3 /2 0 1 1 3 0 /0 9 /2 0 1 1 3 0 /1 2 /2 0 1 1 3 1 /0 1 /2 0 1 2 0 2 /1 2 /2 0 1 0 3 1 /0 3 /2 0 1 1 3 0 /0 9 /2 0 1 1 3 1 /0 1 /2 0 1 2 0 2 /0 4 /2 0 1 2 3 1 /0 3 /2 0 1 1 0 2 /0 4 /2 0 1 2 2 9 /0 7 /2 0 1 1 2 8 /0 2 /2 0 1 2 0 2 /0 4 /2 0 1 2 3 1 /1 2 /2 0 1 2 3 0 /0 3 /2 0 1 2 3 1 /1 2 /2 0 1 2 2 9 /0 3 /2 0 1 3 0 2 /0 4 /2 0 1 2 2 9 /0 3 /2 0 1 3 2 9 /0 3 /2 0 1 3 2 9 /0 3 /2 0 1 3 1 5 /0 2 /2 0 1 2 2 9 /0 3 /2 0 1 3
D 7 . 2 P o w e r F lo w C o n t r o l D e v ic e s f ir s t v e r s io n D 7 . 2 L in e C a p a c it y P r e d ic t io n f ir s t v e r s io n D 1 3 . 3 G r o u n d O p e r a t io n a l R u le s ( W A M S ) Im p le m e n ta tio n P la n H ig h le v e l ( a g r e e m e n t ) th e n D e ta ile d D 7 . 1 I n s t a lla t io n P la n f o r t h e P M U s I n s t a lla t io n P la n f o r t h e P o w e r F lo w C o n t r o l A lg o r it h m I n s t a lla t io n P la n f o r t h e A m p a c it ie s F o r e c a s t e r A lg o r it h m F in a liz a t io n o f t h e I n s t a lla t io n P la n f o r t h e G r o u n d O p e r a t io n a l R u le s ( W A M S ) E x e c u tio n D 1 3 .1 S e t- u p o f a W A M S D 1 3 .2 T o o ls (in C o re s o ) P o w e r F lo w C o n t r o l A lg o r it h m ( in c l. t e s t s ) A m p a c it ie s f o r e c a s t e r G r o u n d O p e r a t io n a l R u le s ( W A M S ) D e m o n s tr a tio n E x p e r im e n t a t io n ( m o n it o r in g o f s o m e K P I s + E x c e l D I Y t o o ls ) O p e r a t io n ( m o n it o r in g o f a ll K P I s t h r o u g h in t e g r a t e d p r o t o t y p e ) A n a ly s is & D e p lo y m e n t M 1 5 .6 In p u t fro m D E M O # 5 D 7 . 3 P F C D f in a l r e p o r t D 7 . 3 L C P f in a l r e p o r t D 7 . 3 W A M S f in a l r e p o r t W S 4 N e t w o r k w o r k s h o p ( T S O s + D S O s + p la y e r s ) D 1 6 . 5 R e p o r t o n t e c h . & e c o n . im p a c t
Page 88 of 102
Demo #6. FLEXGRID WP 8: R& D Give more flexibility to the transmission grid
2010 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 WP 8 R& D Give more flexibility to the transmission grid Task 8.1: Real Time Thermal Rating (RTTR) Task 8.1.1: Definition of the requirements Task 8.1.2: Selection of location of RTTR device Task 8.1.3: Computation of measurements and Analysis on wind power generation disgregation on monitored lines Task 8.1.4: Correlation function definition Task 8.2: FACTS Task 8.2.1: Selection of the location of the FACTS Task 8.2.2: Specification of the device Task 8.2.3: Dimensioning and selection of the components 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2011 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2012 9 10 11 12 1 2013 2 3
Page 89 of 102
WP 14: DEMO #6 Give more flexibility to the transmission grid

2010 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 WP 14 DEMO #6 Give more flexibility to the transmission grid Task 14.1: Real Time Thermal Rating (RTTR) Task 14.1.1: Infrastructure set up and data registering to RTTR Task 14.2: FACTS Task 14.2.1: Design and building of the FACTS Task 14.2.2: Previous studies and tests of the FACTS device. Task 14.2.3: Design and construction of the high voltage elements required before the installation Task 14.2.4: Installation of the FACTS Device Task 14.2.5: Fields tests of FACT Device Task 14.3: Models validation and operation tools / Adjustment of the Control System Task 14.4: Measure the behaviour of the devices in service and conclusions. DISSEMINATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2011 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2012 9 10 11 12 1 2013 2 3
Page 90 of 102
WP 17.Off-Shore Barriers
Page 91 of 102
Annex 2. LIST OF ACRONYMS

Nr 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 ACRONYM ACE AGC B2B B2C CB CHP CWE DACF DLR DSO EMS ENTSO-E FACTS GOPs HR2 HVDC LCC LU MTDC NOIS NREL NTC OLC OPF OPPC PDC PFCD PMU PSP PSSE PSTs PTPC RTTR S&D SoS SPFC TSO UCTE VPP VSC WAMS WPTS Meaning Area Control Error Automatic Generator Control Business to Business Business to Customer Circuit Braker Combined Heat and Power Plants Central Western Europe Day Ahead Congestion Forecast Dynamic Line Rating Distribution System Operator Energy Management System European Network of Transmmission System Operators for Electricity Flexible AC Transmmission System Good Operating Practices Horns Rev 2 High Voltage Direct Current Line Conmutated Controller Local Units Multi-terminal DC Nordic Operation Information System National Renewable Energy Laboratory Net Transfer Capacity Overload Line Controller Optimal Power Flow Optical Phase Conductor Phasor Data Concentrator Power Flow Control Devices Phasor Measurement Unit Power System Protection Plans Power System Simulator Phase Shifting Transformers Point-To-PointConnections Real Time Thermal Ratings Sales and Distribution Security of Supply Smart-Power Flow Control Transmmission System Operator Union for the Coordination of Transmission of Electricity Virtual Power Plant Voltage Source Converter Wide Area Monitoring Systems Wind Power Time Series
Page 92 of 102
Annex 3. SPANISH SECONDARY FREQUENCY CONTROL SYSTEM (RCP)
I. Introduction
Secondary Regulation is a facultative service system managed by market mechanisms: The objectives of Secondary regulation service are: Cancel the deviation at every moment in the exchange programs. Keep the system frequency at the reference value.
The providers of the secondary regulation service are the Regulation Areas (also called control areas) in response to the requirements of the master regulator of the TSO. This master regulator is known by the acronym RCP (Shared Peninsular Regulation) A Regulation Area is a grouping of production units, which as a whole, has the capacity to regulate in response to the commands of an Automatic Generation Control (AGC) system complying with the requirements and permitting evaluation from an energy control system in real time. The regulation areas are made up of units, previously authorized by the TSO and respond to control signals sent by the corresponding AGC units and others not qualified for active participation in the secondary regulation ancillary service. Upwards/Downwards Secondary Regulation Reserve Band is the maximum value of the power variation in which can be modified the generation output of all units under control, in each sense (up/down) an according to the required speed in response to the control system requests. Net effective Secondary Regulation energy is the actual net-net effective secondary regulation energy made in a programming period; it is the deviation in energy with respect to their programs of all production units integrated into the control loop of each AGC due to tracking the requirements of the secondary regulation The main functions of the TSO associated with secondary regulation service are: Authorize the creation and modification of regulatory areas. Enable the production units to participate actively in the service. Identify and communicate daily to the service providers the system requirement for each programming period of the following day. Setting the reserve ratio required to raise and lower areas of regulation and the maximum and minimum regulation band allowable for each offer in accordance with the provisions of the procedures by establishing performance criteria and safety system. Management of the market for secondary regulation band. As responsible of the master control system (RCP): o o o o Real time assessment of regulation requirement and its split between regulation areas. Carry out monitoring of the response of the regulation areas. Transfer the secondary regulation system to backup system, and vice versa, when necessary, and report promptly of this fact to the leaders of regulation areas. Calculate the terms established for the remuneration and allocation of costs for the provision of this service.
Page 93 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Ensuring the proper functioning of the regulation system and its adaptation to the requirements of the electrical system.
I.i
Mainconcepts
The correct operation of the interconnected mainland system, both from the standpoint of economic and operation security, requires coordination between the "Zone Regulators" (which perform the Power-Frequency control function in each area) in such a way that the available resources for regulation are shared effectively, and in order to keep within reasonable limits: The deviation in the trade program with France in relation to the schedule, plus the cooperation in the maintenance of joint frequency. The deviation of the system frequency with respect to the nominal frequency in case of isolated operation system.
To perform this function of shared regulation, System Operator coordinates directly the Area Regulator, acting as "Master Controller ", splitting and transmitting the control signal to the various Area Regulators, the power values to contribute to shared regulation, according to factors of participation resulting from the allocation of reserves in the secondary regulation market. In addition, it generates the results of the service used for its clearance. So, the secondary regulation system in Spain is a hierarchical system where there is a master regulator (RCP) controlled by TSO that sends its signals to different Zone-Regulators as follows:
DEFINITIONS RCP: Shared Peninsular Regulation Master Controller: energy control system that receives the basic signals of the shared regulation and generates the set point requirement for each Regulation Zone and the results used for settlement Area/Zone Regulator: energy control system which receiving signals from master regulator controller, rules the generation of the units included in its area. Regulation Area/Zone: A group of physical generation units whose sum of instantaneous measurements of net active power supplied to the network is controlled by zone regulator. Generating units belonging to more than one player may be allocated to different regulation areas provided they are not under control.
Page 94 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Automatic Generation Control (AGC) software function used by area regulators to perform power-frequency control to automatically adjust the power generated by the units based on power and frequency set points, voiding the area control error. Area Control Error Zone (ACE): Deviation, expressed in power magnitudes, of the values of generated power and frequency regarding to the set points in a regulation area. Area Generation (PI): Instantaneous value of total net power generated by each of the groups belonging to regulation area regulation. Area Generation Program (NSI): Instantaneous value of total net active generation as the sum of the schedule of the generating units belonging to a regulation area Area Generation Deviation (NID): The difference between the value of scheduled generation and the generation of a regulation area Generation in Control of the Area (PGC): Instantaneous value of the sum net active generation under the AGC control in a regulation area Net Exchange Deviation of Peninsular Regulation (NIDR): Deviation of the net scheduled exchange between the peninsular electrical system and the rest of the interconnected systems. Total requirement of the Peninsular Regulation (RRP): Additional power required by the master regulator to all regulation areas to cancel the net exchange deviation of peninsular regulation Required Contribution to the Regulation (CRR): Amount of power required by the master controller to each zone regulators to cancel the net exchange deviation of peninsular regulation.
I.ii Regulationalgorithmandcontrol
RCP requires that both the master and area controller stay in touch, and carry out functions that are assigned. Among others, the functions of the area regulators are those are detailed below: Receive the required contribution to the regulation of each zone (CRRI) sent by the Master Controller, which is determined by the RCP function as described in subsequent sections. Reduce the value of its own area control error (ACEi) to zero with minimum delay for which the area regulator must be set in power-frequency mode. The ACEi is calculated according to following equations:
ACEi =
NIDi = NSIi PIi Where:
NIDi 10 Bi (f a - f s) + CRRi G
(1)
(2)
ACEi = area control error of area i NIDi = deviation of generation in area i G = damping factor of area deviation
Page 95 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Bi = "bias" frequency constant of the zone i (positive) fa = actual frequency of the system for zone i fs = frequency programmed for the zone i CRRI = required contribution to the regulation of the zone i NSIi = generation program in the area i PIi = generation of the zone i The constant "bias" Bi frequency is determined as: Bi = B Kni MW/0.1Hz (3) where: B = Bias constant of the total peninsular system frequency Kri = nominal unitary participation of the area in primary regulation (Input calculated yearly according to ENSTO-E rules based on the production of this area the previous year). In the above equations the scheduled power is considered positive. Consequently, a positive generation deviation indicates a deficiency of generation in a particular regulation area. To transmit to the master controller the required values to run the RCP algorithm:
MASTER CONTROLLER The master control is responsible for executing the implementation of RCP itself. The basic functions of the RCP include: Determining the status of each zone Determine the mode of implementation of the RCP Calculating the PRR and the CRR for each zone Monitoring the response of each area and adjustment participation factors of each area Treatment of RCP reserves
STATES OF REGULATION AREA Each zone/area has an associated regulation state, which indicates its current condition and its treatment in the RCP calculations. The operator can select and input manually three possible zone situations: ON when the area is actually taking part in the shared regulation OFF when the zone is not participating in shared regulation OFF REE when the lack of involvement of this zone in the shared regulation is due to a requirement of the master regulator
Page 96 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI The possible states and transitions of each Regulation Area are: Possible states State Conditions
RCP MODES RCP runs at any time in one of these three modes: NORMAL: NORMAL mode of RCP represents the most desirable state of operation of the whole system. FREQUENCY: FREQUENCY mode of CPR is representative of the situation which the peninsular system has been isolated from France or behaves as if there had been such isolation. The RCP takes appropriate measures aimed at maintaining system security, which translate into regulating as NORMAL mode assuming a null deviation with France (NIDF = 0). NULL: This mode is the mode when the RCP cannot be determine with certainty as NORMAL, or FREQUENCY. NULL mode, once established, it remains effective until one of the other modes to be determined without uncertainty or until, after a given time (NTOLIM), Shared Regulation is suspended automatically.
RCP ALGORITHM A) - Total requirement of peninsular regulation PRR The total requirement of peninsular regulation is always calculated as follows:
PRR =
FNID R
i =1
1 Xi NID i 10 B P f 10 B M f G
(4a) (4 b)
If |PRR| > BM; or PRR = 0 if |PRR| <BM where
FNIDR = filtered value of deviation of the net exchange of regulation, NIDR, (non-linear filter) G = damping factor of area deviation N = number of areas of shared regulation
Page 97 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI Xi = 1 if i zone status is ACTIVE 0 if the state of the area is not active i NIDI = deviation of generation in the area i BM = dead- band below which PRR = 0 The calculation of deviation of net exchange of regulation NIDR regulation is as follows: NIDR = NIDF-KP (-10 NIDP f BP)-KM (-10 NIDM f BM) Being: NIDR = deviation of net exchange of regulation. NIDF = deviation of net exchange of regulation between the Iberian Peninsula and France, where the Iberian Peninsula is considered as control area NIDM = deviation of net exchange of regulation between Spain and Morocco BP = "bias" frequency constant of Portugal BM = "bias" frequency constant of Morocco KP = obligation of regulation, in pu, of France regarding the deviation of Portugal NIDP KM = obligation of regulation, in pu, of France regarding the deviation of Morocco NIDM f = Frequency deviation fa - fs B). Calculation of the required contribution to the regulation CRRi The CRRi calculation depends on several factors: RCP mode State of areas Whether or not the conditions for permissive mode of regulation are meet. (5)
On this basis, the value of CRRI is calculated from the forms that are detailed below: 1. For NORMAL or Frequency mode the CRRi are calculated dividing the PRR between the area regulators which are in service, i.e. among those whose status is not OFF or INACTIVE: If the state of the area is active:
i
CRR
K PRR
i
(6)
If the status of the area is EMERGENCY
CRR
PRR
1 NID i G
(7)
In both cases, Ki is the participation factor assigned to zone i,. 2. In NORMAL mode or frequency of a zone can RCP regular in permissive mode. The conditions that must be taken for this to occur are: The area control error of the area is opposite to the error control area of the peninsular system with France. Page 98 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI ACER absolute value exceeds a certain threshold. (8)
The error of the global area of the peninsula on France, ACER, is calculated as: ACER = NIDR -10 B f When both conditions are met, the control action in the area would tend to increase the value of ACER rather than decrease, even when, for all the areas the total action is correct and tends to reduce the error of global area. To avoid this situation in permissive mode the CRRi adopt a value which makes the ACEi equal to 0. 3. In NULL mode of RCP the CRRI in each area are maintained constant in the last valid value that had in the previous mode. If NULL mode is maintained long enough for the RCP be suspended automatically, CRRi will no longer be sent to regulation area. MONITORING THE RESPONSE OF AN AREA In order to ensure the achievement of the objectives of the RCP function, it is necessary to incorporate a control logic to monitor the functioning of each area and determine if each responds reasonably under the conditions of shared regulation at every time. This control logic is used to see if the magnitude of these values is consistent with the CRRI sent to them. Moreover, this logical area response monitoring is responsible for determining whether a particular area meets the EMERGENCY criteria. In fact the status of each zone is determined by this control logic at the beginning of each RCP cycle. A). Monitoring the response of generation under control Desired Power Generation under Control from area i: Firstly, it is determined the desired power generation under control from the area i to cancel its area control error. Therefore, it is calculated as the power generation under control in the previous control cycle PGC increased by the area control error of the cycle: PGCDi(t) = PGCi (t-1) + 1/G * NIDi (t-1)+ CRRi (t-1) 10*Bi * fi (t-1) Where: PGCi (t-1) = PGCi received from the area i in the previous cycle NIDi (t-1) = NIDi received from the area i in the previous cycle CRRi (t-1) = CRRi sent to the area i in the previous cycle fi (t-1) = frequency deviation of area i in the previous cycle, Expected response from area i With the value of PGCDi, which as it has been explained, take into account the CRRi sent in the previous cycle, it is modelled the expected response of each zone whose status is ACTIVE or EMERGENCY. The function used to model this response is simply a first-order exponential: (9)
SUM 1 = 1 + s T 1i PGCDi
i
(s)
(10)
If no change in the groups involved in the calculation of the PGC, it is expressed as follows: SUM1i (t) = 1i PGCDi (t) + (1- 1i) SUM1i (t - 1) Where: www.twenties-project.eu Page 99 of 102 (11)
Project Objectives & KPI SUM1i (t) = expected value of the total power regulation of zone i for the current control cycle SUM1i (t-1) = expected value of the total power regulation of zone i in the previous cycle control T1i = time constant to simulate the speed of i response area 1i = ratio between the time of the implementation cycle algorithm and the time constant T1i Response failure in the area i To determine the error response it is used the following logic, in order to reduce the value of the error to a minimum: 1. If the value of PGCi is a value between the value of SUM1i and the value of PGCDi: ERRi (t) = 0 (12) 2. If the value of PGCi is closer to PGCDi than SUM1i: ERRI (t) = SUM1i (t)-PCGi (t) 3. If the value of IGCP is closer to SUM1i than PGCDi: ERRI (t) = PGCDi (t)-IGCP (t) Delayed Error Monitoring in the area i The resulting response error from zone is passed through a delayed filter: (14) (13)
SUM 1 = 1 + s T 2 i ERRi ( s )
i
(15)
That expressed discreetly: SUM1 (t) = 2i ERRi (t) + (1- 2 i) SUM1 i (t - 1) if |SUM1 i (t)| K3 AT (16)
i i
SUM 1 = K 3 AT
if |SUM1 i (t) |> K3 ATi Where:
SUM 1 ( t ) SUM 1 ( t )
i i
(17)
SUM1i (t) = delayed tracking error for the area current control cycle SUM1i (t-1) = delayed tracking error in zone I in the previous control cycle T2i = constant time of delay of the response error in area i 2i = ratio between the implementation time of the cycle and the time constant T2i K3 = constant that limits the value of delayed response error in zone i ATi = threshold of bad response in the area i The absolute value of error delayed SUMI is therefore limited to K3 times the ATi in order to avoid growing constantly. www.twenties-project.eu Page 100 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI The use of this filter allows that a tracking error persist during an adjustable time, which depends on the magnitude of error, before it reaches the threshold of bad response for the area ATi. T2i time constant and the parameters involved in calculating the bad response threshold, should be adjusted according the criteria of the best practices of regulation established. Calculation of bad response threshold in the area i The bad response threshold of area I, ATi, is used to be compared with the absolute value of delayed error SUM1i. The value of this threshold is calculated as: ATi = K2 * CTBCAPi * (RESNUP + RESNDW) if ATi K4 ATi = K4 If ATi <K4 (17 b) Being: RESNUP = Upwards nominal reserve power in RCP during the current hour. RESNDW = Downwards nominal reserve power in RCP during the current hour CTBCAPi = Nominal capacity for contribution to regulation from zone i in the current hour K2 = Constant for ATi calculation K4 = Constant which limits the minimum value of ATi B) Calculation of the correction Factors: Passing to EMENGENCY mode Bad response condition because lack of response: (20) Bad response detection because of excess of response Bad response for excess is when the difference between the desired generation, PGCDi, and generation in control PGCi has a sign contrary to PRR: (PGCDi PGCi) * PRR < 0 As normally (PGCDi PGCi) has the same sign as SUM1i , we can express the same condition as: SUM1i * PRR < 0 Calculation of the correction factor for zone i (CORFTRi) During the bad response of zone i we should proceed to adjust the participation of each zone through correction factors in such a way that the desired zone response tend to actual zone response. This is achieved by modifying the correction factors of each zone though 1 and 2 coefficients. The nominal value is CORFTRi = 1: o Bad response because of excess of response: |SUM1i| > ATi (19) (18)
Page 101 of 102
Project Objectives & KPI CORFTRi = CORFTRi + 1 ( |SUM1i| / ATi ) if CORFTRi < 1 CORFTRi = CORFTRi * (1/2) ( |SUM1i| / ATi ) if 1 < CORFTRi < 2 CORFTRi = 0 if 2 < CORFTRi In this case the zone i pass to EMERGENCY mode. o Bad response because of lack of response: CORFTRi = CORFTRi * 2 ( ATi / |SUM1i|) if CORFTRi > 1 CORFTRi = CORFTRi - 1 ( |SUM1i| / ATi ) if CORFTRi < 1 CORFTRi = 0 if CORFTRi < 1 ( |SUM1i| / ATi ) In this case the zone i pass to EMERGENCY mode.
Page 102 of 102
EC-GA n Project full title:
249812 Transmission system operation with large penetration of Wind and other renewable Electricity sources in Networks by means of innovative Tools and Integrated Energy Solutions

D 2 1 Objectives KPIs Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

D 2 1 Objectives KPIs Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project Objectives & KPI

Project Objectives & KPI

Document info sheet

Task Leader WP Leader

Project Objectives & KPI

1. Project Objectives, expected impacts and barriers to be overcome:

3. Tools and methodologies for impact assessment:

Project Objectives & KPI

Table 1: DEMO LEVEL

% (kV) or YES/NO if set point not achievable

Settling time less than 5 minutes

% (kV) or YES/NO if set point not achievable

Settling time less than 5 minutes.

Project Objectives & KPI

KPI.D2.1 KPI.D2.2 KPI.D2.3 KPI.D2.4 KPI.D2.5

10 total 4 15/ 7.5 150 / 30 0

(0 0 1 x) 1 structure + 2 nodes (PTPC) None 1 2

KPI.D3.2 KPI.D3.3 KPI.D3.4

3 structure + >4 nodes 2+2 3 40

% of the power transmitted in normal conditions

Improved wind turbine flexibility

Project Objectives & KPI Year 1

Management strategies for a storm

Operating the HVDC interconnection with respect to real-time balancing

Hydro power control strategies

% # taps % % Frequencyof revision % % %

Project Objectives & KPI KPI.D5.NETF LEX.4 KPI.D5.NETF LEX.4

Loss from GOPs Combined Gain

Line Capacity Gain obtained by using RTTR or SRTTR (MVA or %)

KPI.D6.2Y >= 115%

Errors in the forecast of the Thermal Rating

KPI.D6.3 <= 35%

Capacity Gain due to the use of the Device

KPI.D6.4Y >= 110%

Cost of the re-dispatch of conventional generation Number of realized switching operations

Renewable generation curtailed

Project Objectives & KPI Target Value

Cost and profitability

30% of Cost Reduction

Project Objectives & KPI

Table 2 TASKFORCE LEVEL

Project Objectives & KPI

KPI.16.TF1.6: KPI.16.TF1.7 KPI.16.TF1.8

GWh/year EUR / EUR tonne CO2/year

Project Objectives & KPI

Project Objectives & KPI

KPI.15.TF3.8 KPI.16.TF3.1 KPI.16.TF3.2 KPI.16.TF3.3

EUR/year EUR/year EUR tonnes CO2/year

Project Objectives & KPI

Table 3 PROJECT LEVEL

EUR/year EUR/year tonnes CO2/year EUR / MW

Project Objectives & KPI

Tools and methodologies for impact assessment

Project Objectives & KPI

Project Objectives & KPI

Project Objectives & KPI

Project Objectives & KPI

2.1 DEMO #1 SYSTEM SERVICES PROVIDED BY WIND FARMS (SYSERWIND)

See details in Annex II

Project Objectives & KPI

Dynamic response of the wind energy AGC regulator.

Project Objectives & KPI