Your browser does not support JavaScript!
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com
1887

access icon free Incorporating the effects of service quality regulation in decision-making framework of distribution companies

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology
Received 03/11/2017, Accepted 07/08/2018, Revised 11/07/2018, Published 21/08/2018

Incentive regulations of reliability have made a link between distribution companies' revenue and their service reliability. The companies have to decide how much to spend on various projects to provide an acceptable level of reliability while anticipation of load growth. Planners and decision makers require a comprehensive framework to optimally allocate available budgets to different plans with the highest benefits considering implementation of incentive regulation. This paper proposes a decision framework for the optimum share of expansion and reliability oriented plans in presence of reward–penalty mechanisms. A two-layer optimization model is introduced, where in the outer layer, an iterative algorithm is applied to determine the optimal set of long-term projects including Distributed Generations (DGs) installation. A heuristic optimization algorithm is employed in this layer. Considering long-term plans, in inner optimization layer, the optimal set of mid-term plans including feeder reinforcement, and preventive maintenance actions are determined using algorithms such as Branch-and-Cut and dynamic programming techniques. The model is further implemented on a test distribution network and the results are investigated through various case studies. Obtained results show the strong influence of incentive regulation on reliability indices.

Inspec keywords: power distribution economics; decision making; power distribution reliability; optimisation; iterative methods; preventive maintenance; combinatorial mathematics; power distribution planning

Other keywords: feeder reinforcement; distributed generations installation; distribution companies; two-layer optimisation model; preventive maintenance actions; financial link; test distribution network; load growth; expansion plans; reliability-oriented plans; incentive regulations; dynamic programming technique; mid-term plans; decision-making framework; iterative algorithm; heuristic optimisation algorithm; optimisation layer; optimal available budget allocation; branch-and-cut technique; service quality regulation; reliability indices; reward-penalty mechanisms

Subjects: Power system management, operation and economics; Plant engineering, maintenance and safety; Reliability; Combinatorial mathematics; Optimisation techniques; Distribution networks; Interpolation and function approximation (numerical analysis); Power system planning and layout

References

    1. 1)
      • 4. Mohammadi, A., Mehrtash, M., Kargarian, A.: ‘Diagonal quadratic approximation for decentralized collaborative TSO + DSO optimal power flow’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2018, pp. 1–1, DOI: 10.1109/TSG.2018.2796034.
    2. 2)
      • 19. Larimi, S.M.M., Haghifam, M.R., Moradkhani, A.: ‘Risk-based reconfiguration of active electric distribution networks’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2016, 10, (4), pp. 1006–1015.
    3. 3)
      • 29. Küfeoğlu, S., Lehtonen, M.: ‘Comparison of different models for estimating the residential sector customer interruption costs’, Electr. Power Syst. Res., 2015, 122, pp. 50–55.
    4. 4)
      • 31. Brown, R.E.: ‘System reliability and power quality: performance-based rates and guarantees’. Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, Chicago, IL, USA, July 2002, pp. 784–787.
    5. 5)
      • 28. Hejazi, H., Araghi, A.R., Vahidi, B., et al: ‘Independent distributed generation planning to profit both utility and DG investors’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2013, 28, (2), pp. 1170–1178.
    6. 6)
      • 22. Alvehag, K., Awodele, K., ‘Impact of reward and penalty scheme on the incentives for distribution system reliability’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2014, 29, (1), pp. 386–394.
    7. 7)
      • 16. Mohammadnezhad-Shourkaei, H., Abiri-Jahromi, A., Fotuhi-Firuzabad, M.: ‘Incorporating service quality regulation in distribution system maintenance strategy’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2011, 26, (4), pp. 2495–2504.
    8. 8)
      • 12. Rupolo, D., Pereira, B.R.Jr, Contreras, J., et al: ‘Medium- and low-voltage planning of radial electric power distribution systems considering reliability’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2017, 11, (9), pp. 2212–2221.
    9. 9)
      • 30. Küfeoğlu, S., Lehtonen, M.: ‘Interruption costs of service sector electricity customers, a hybrid approach’, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., 2015, 64, pp. 588–595.
    10. 10)
      • 2. Council of European Energy Regulators (CEER): ‘6th CEER benchmarking report on the quality of electricity and gas supply’, 2016, Available on: https://www.ceer.eu/.
    11. 11)
      • 3. Ghasemi, M., Dashti, R.: ‘A risk-based model for performance-based regulation of electric distribution companies’, Util. Policy, 2017, 45, pp. 36–44.
    12. 12)
      • 18. Moradkhani, A., Haghifam, M.R., Abedi, S.M.: ‘Risk-based maintenance scheduling in the presence of reward penalty scheme’, Electr. Power Syst. Res., 2015, 121, pp. 126–133.
    13. 13)
      • 15. Alvehag, K., Söder, L.: ‘Risk-based method for distribution system reliability investment decisions under performance-based regulation’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2011, 5, (10), pp. 1062–1072.
    14. 14)
      • 17. Aravinthan, V., Jewell, W.: ‘Optimized maintenance scheduling for budget-constrained distribution utility’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2013, 4, (4), pp. 2328–2338.
    15. 15)
      • 6. Asensio, M., de Quevedo, P.M., Munoz-Delgado, G., et al: ‘Joint distribution network and renewable energy expansion planning considering demand response and energy storage – Part I: stochastic programming model’, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, 2018, 2, (9), pp. 655–666.
    16. 16)
      • 5. Bahrami, S., Amini, M.H., Shafie-khah, M., et al: ‘A decentralized electricity market scheme enabling demand response deployment’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2017, 31, (4), pp. 4218–4227.
    17. 17)
      • 11. Muñoz-Delgado, G., Contreras, J., Arroyo, J.M.: ‘Multistage generation and network expansion planning in distribution systems considering uncertainty and reliability’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2016, 31, (5), pp. 3715–3728.
    18. 18)
      • 10. Muñoz-Delgado, G., Contreras, J., Arroyo, J.M.: ‘Distribution network expansion planning with an explicit formulation for reliability assessment’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2018, 33, (3), pp. 2583–2596.
    19. 19)
      • 7. Muñoz-Delgado, G., Contreras, J., Arroyo, J.M.: ‘Joint expansion planning of distributed generation and distribution networks’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2015, 30, (5), pp. 2579–2590.
    20. 20)
      • 8. Asensio, M., Muñoz-Delgado, G., Contreras, J.: ‘Bi-level approach to distribution network and renewable energy expansion planning considering demand response’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2017, 32, (6), pp. 4298–4309.
    21. 21)
      • 25. Short, T.A.: ‘Electric power distribution handbook’ (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2014).
    22. 22)
      • 21. Abiri-Jahromi, A., Fotuhi-Firuzabad, M., Abbasi, E.: ‘An efficient mixed-integer linear formulation for long-term overhead lines maintenance scheduling in power distribution systems’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2009, 24, (4), pp. 2043–2053.
    23. 23)
      • 27. Allan, R. N., Billinton, R., Sjarief, I., et al: ‘A reliability test system for educational purposes-basic distribution system data and results’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1991, 6, (2), pp. 813–820.
    24. 24)
      • 14. Lotero, R.C., Contreras, J.: ‘Distribution system planning with reliability’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2011, 26, (4), pp. 2552–2562.
    25. 25)
      • 26. Billinton, R., Pan, Z., ‘Historic performance-based distribution system risk assessment’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2004, 19, (4), pp. 1759–1765.
    26. 26)
      • 23. Simab, M., Alvehag, K., Söder, L., et al: ‘Designing reward and penalty scheme in performance-based regulation for electric distribution companies’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2012, 6, (9), pp. 893–901.
    27. 27)
      • 20. Ramanathan, B., Hennessy, D.A., Brown, R.E.: ‘Decision-making and policy implications of performance-based regulation’. Power Systems Conf. Exposition, Atlanta, GA, USA, October 2006, pp. 394–401.
    28. 28)
      • 13. Heidari, S., Fotuhi-Firuzabad, M., Lehtonen, M.: ‘Planning to equip the power distribution networks with automation system’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2017, 32, (5), pp. 3451–3460.
    29. 29)
      • 24. Mohammadnezhad-Shourkaei, H., Fotuhi-Firuzabad, M.: ‘Impact of penalty–reward mechanism on the performance of electric distribution systems and regulator budget’, IET Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2010, 4, (7), pp. 770–779.
    30. 30)
      • 1. Fumagalli, E., Schiavo, L., Delestre, F.: ‘Service quality regulation in electricity distribution and retail’ (Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin, Germany, 2007).
    31. 31)
      • 9. Zare, A., Chung, C., Zhan, J., et al: ‘A distributionally robust chance-constrained MILP model for multistage distribution system planning with uncertain renewables and loads’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2018, 33, (5), pp. 5248–5262.
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-gtd.2018.6141
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/iet-gtd.2018.6141
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading
Print this page
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address