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

access icon free Loss and emission reduction allocation in distribution networks using MCRS method and Aumann–Shapley value method

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology
Received 07/02/2018, Accepted 11/10/2018, Revised 05/07/2018, Published 11/10/2018

In order to provide reasonable economic signals for distribution companies (DISCOs) and further compensate for distributed generators (DGs) integrated in distribution networks equitably, the contributions of DGs to loss and emission reduction in distribution networks should be allocated according to their own responsibilities. Generally, the loss and emission reduction of the network can be allocated based on traditional cooperative-game-based allocation methods such as nucleolus method and Shapley value method. However, traditional cooperative-game-based allocation methods will result in the combinational explosion problem with the integration of a large number of DGs. In order to tackle this problem, minimum costs-remaining savings (MCRS) method and Aumann–Shapley value method are employed for loss and emission reduction allocation. Simulation results of two cases show that compared with the allocation results of traditional cooperative-game-based allocation methods, the proposed MCRS method and Aumann–Shapley value method both have the characteristics of individual rationality, coalition rationality, and global rationality. Furthermore, neither MCRS method nor Aumann–Shapley value method has the problem of combinational explosion, which can reduce computational burden with regard to the integration of a large number of DGs.

Inspec keywords: combinatorial mathematics; power distribution economics; distributed power generation; game theory

Other keywords: economic signals; emission reduction allocation; global rationality; coalition rationality; minimum costs-remaining savings method; individual rationality; loss reduction allocation; distributed generators; combinational explosion problem; distribution companies; Aumann-Shapley value method; distribution networks; DISCO; MCRS method

Subjects: Distributed power generation; Game theory; Combinatorial mathematics; Power system management, operation and economics; Distribution networks

References

    1. 1)
      • 1. Kashyap, S.S., De, M.: ‘Loss allocation and loss minimisation for radial distribution system including DGs’, IET Renew. Power Gener., 2017, 11, (6), pp. 806–818.
    2. 2)
      • 21. Shaloudegi, K., Madinehi, N., Hosseinian, S.H., et al: ‘A novel policy for locational marginal price calculation in distribution systems based on loss reduction allocation using game theory’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2012, 27, (2), pp. 811–820.
    3. 3)
      • 13. Tan, X., Lie, T.T.: ‘Application of the Shapley value on transmission cost allocation in the competitive power market environment’, IEE Proc., Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2002, 149, (1), pp. 15–20.
    4. 4)
      • 18. Lima, D.A., Contreras, J., Padilha-Feltrin, A.: ‘A cooperative game theory analysis for transmission loss allocation’, Electr. Power Syst. Res., 2008, 78, (2), pp. 264–275.
    5. 5)
      • 29. Faria, E., Barroso, L.A., Kelman, R., et al: ‘Allocation of firm-energy rights among hydro plants: an Aumann-Shapley approach’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2009, 24, (2), pp. 541–551.
    6. 6)
      • 17. Du, S., Zhou, X., Mo, L., et al: ‘A novel nucleolus-based loss allocation method in bilateral electricity markets’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2006, 21, (1), pp. 28–33.
    7. 7)
      • 3. Costa, P. M., Matos, M. A.: ‘Loss allocation in distribution networks with embedded generation’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2004, 19, (1), pp. 384–389.
    8. 8)
      • 30. Walling, R.A., Saint, R., Dugan, R.C., et al: ‘Summary of distributed resources impact on power delivery systems’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2008, 23, (3), pp. 1636–1644.
    9. 9)
      • 27. Molina, Y.P., Prada, R.B., Saavedra, O.R.: ‘Complex losses allocation to generators and loads based on circuit theory and Aumann-Shapley method’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2010, 25, (4), pp. 1928–1936.
    10. 10)
      • 28. Bakirtzis, A.G.: ‘Aumann-Shapley transmission congestion pricing’, IEEE Power Eng. Rev., 2000, 21, (3), pp. 67–69.
    11. 11)
      • 19. Hu, Z.Y., Chen, L., Gan, D.Q., et al: ‘Allocation of unit start-up costs using cooperative game theory’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2006, 21, (2), pp. 653–662.
    12. 12)
      • 16. Galiana, F.D., Phelan, M.: ‘Allocation of transmission losses to bilateral contracts in a competitive environment’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2000, 15, (1), pp. 143–150.
    13. 13)
      • 14. Stamtsis, G.C., Erlich, I.: ‘Use of cooperative game theory in power system fixed-cost allocation’, IEE Proc., Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2004, 151, (3), pp. 401–406.
    14. 14)
      • 26. Junqueira, M., Costa, L.C.D., Barroso, L.A., et al: ‘An Aumann-Shapley approach to allocate transmission service cost among network users in electricity markets’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2007, 22, (4), pp. 1532–1546.
    15. 15)
      • 22. Farsani, E.A., Abyaneh, H.A., Abedi, M., et al: ‘A novel policy for LMP calculation in distribution networks based on loss and emission reduction allocation using nucleolus theory’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2016, 31, (1), pp. 143–152.
    16. 16)
      • 20. Cui, Q., Wang, X.L., Wang, X.F., et al: ‘Residential appliances direct load control in real-time using cooperative game’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2016, 31, (1), pp. 226–233.
    17. 17)
      • 10. Atanasovski, M., Taleski, R.: ‘Energy summation method for loss allocation in radial distribution networks with DG’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2012, 27, (3), pp. 1433–1440.
    18. 18)
      • 24. Jiu, X.T., Xu, Q.: ‘The MCRS model of profit distribution considering risk factors in apparel supply chain’. 2009 Second Int. Conf. on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation, Changsha, Hunan, China, October 2009, vol. 3, pp. 1017–1020.
    19. 19)
      • 15. Zolezzi, J.M., Rudnick, H.: ‘Transmission cost allocation by cooperative games and coalition formation’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2002, 17, (4), pp. 1008–1015.
    20. 20)
      • 2. Ghofrani-Jahromi, Z., Mahmoodzadch, Z., Ehsan, M.: ‘Distribution loss allocation for radial systems including DGs’, IEEE Trans. Power Deliv., 2014, 29, (1), pp. 72–80.
    21. 21)
      • 12. Tsukamoto, Y., Iyoda, I., Corp, M.E.: ‘Allocation of fixed transmission cost to wheeling transactions by cooperative game theory’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 1996, 11, (2), pp. 620–629.
    22. 22)
      • 23. Chen, W.Y., Fang, D., Xue, D.Z.: ‘Optimal treatment cost allocation methods in pollution control’, Tsinghua Sci. Technol., 1999, 4, (4), pp. 1642–1646.
    23. 23)
      • 7. Conejo, A.J., Galiana, F.D., Kockar, I.: ‘Z-bus loss allocation’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2000, 16, (1), pp. 105–109.
    24. 24)
      • 6. Bialekm, J.W., Kattuman, P.A.: ‘Proportional sharing assumption in tracing methodology’, IEE Proc., Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2004, 151, (4), pp. 526–532.
    25. 25)
      • 8. Carpaneto, E., Chicco, G., Akilimali, J.S.: ‘Branch current decomposition method for loss allocation in radial distribution systems with distributed generation’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2006, 21, (3), pp. 1170–1179.
    26. 26)
      • 25. Molina, Y.P., Saavedra, O.R., Amaris, H.: ‘Transmission network cost allocation based on circuit theory and the Aumann-Shapley method’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2013, 28, (4), pp. 4568–4577.
    27. 27)
      • 9. Atanasovski, M., Taleski, R.: ‘Power summation method for loss allocation in radial distribution networks with DG’, IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 2011, 26, (4), pp. 2491–2499.
    28. 28)
      • 4. Mutale, J., Strbac, G., Curcic, S.: ‘Allocation of losses in distribution systems with embedded generation’, IEE Proc., Gener. Transm. Distrib., 2000, 147, (1), pp. 7–14.
    29. 29)
      • 5. Bialekm, J.W.: ‘Tracing the flow of electricity’, IEE Proc., Gener. Transm. Distrib., 1996, 143, (4), pp. 313–320.
    30. 30)
      • 11. Young, H.P.: ‘Equity: in theory and practice’ (Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA, 1994).
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-gtd.2018.6086
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/iet-gtd.2018.6086
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading
Print this page
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address