IGREENGrid Project Presentation -...

“This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 308864”.

IGREENGrid Project Presentation May 2016

“This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 308864”. 2

The Project: IntegratinG Renewables in the EuropEaN Electricity Grid

Duration 36 months

Period 01/01/2013 – 31/03/2016

Project Budget

6,6 M€ (EC grant: 4,3 M€)

Project Coordinator

IBERDROLA DISTRIBUCIÓN ELÉCTRICA

IGREENGrid project must ensure a strong coordination with SINGULAR and SusTAINABLE projects throughout the project.


The Project: 12 partners from 6 European countries


Project Summary: IGREENGrid project focuses on identifying the most promising solutions for increasing the hosting capacity for Distributed Renewable Energy Sources (DRES) in power distribution grids without compromising the reliability or jeopardizing the quality of supply.

The main final result will be a set of guidelines: Most promising solutions. Recommendations for the integration of DRES in distribution grids,

Methodologies and tools. Criteria to establish hosting capacity and to manage curtailment

procedures. Technical requirements to DRES, equipment manufacturers &

technology providers. Assessment of the scalability and replicability at EU level (from

technical, regulatory and economic point of view).


Continuous coordination and knowledge sharing:

Strong coordination with EEGI and the supporting GRID+ project will be established during the Project to receive appropriate feedback and to maximize the project impact.

IGREENGrid encourages sharing knowledge and promoting the best practices identifying potential solutions for the effective integration of DRES in the six existing Demo Projects in LV and MV grids participating to the project and validating them via simulation in other environments to assess the scalability and replicability at EU level.


Project Planning:

2012 2013 2014 2015

01/2013

03/2016

2013 2014 2015 WP1: Project Coordination

WP4: ANALYZE & COMPARE “most-promising” solutions based on selected KPIs

WP7: Dissemination

WP3: EU Local pilot projects, other important demos and EU relevant initiatives: data gathering

WP2: DRES integration in distribution grids: assessment methodology based on EEGI KPIs

WP5: Technical and economic evaluation and selection of “most-promising” interoperable European solutions WP6: Guidelines for the

future massive integration of DRES in distribution grids: Reference models and Exploitation plan


Local Demo Projects:

ENEL ISERNIA

Salzburg AG / NetzOÖ DG DemoNet, HiT & ZUQDE

RWE ZUKUNFTSNETZE Enedis

VENTEEA

Iberdrola/GNF PRICE

HEDNO DMS support tools

Storage

DSE

ENR VVC

DSE

Control Centre

DER

Control Centre

VVC

Control Centre


DEMO 1 - PRICE: Where and planning:

o Corredor del Henares (Madrid Region). (2011-2014).

Key Figures : o DER involved: Wind and PV (Installed Power: 73 MW). o Customers : 200.000 at MV and LV .

Objectives: o Monitor and automate the MV/LV power network, improving its operation and

maintenance. o Improve the integration of already existing distributed generation. o Forecasting and monitoring system for distributed generation. o DSVC system for voltage stabilization. o Specification of the Distributed Generation Control Center. o Contribution to interoperability and common open standards.

Smart Grids Functions : o Control and automation of electric grid

MV/LV. o New energy management system o Power system for voltage stability of the

generator = 2 x DFACTS o New options and integration of demand

services.


DEMO 2 - ISERNIA: Where and planning:

o Caprione (Isernia Region). (03/2011-03/2015).

Key Figures : o DER involved: Hydroelectric (9 MW), Biogas (0,65 MW) and

PV (82 kW). o Customers : 8.000 at LV and 25 at MV.

Objectives: o Under real field conditions:

o Demonstrates a new telecommunication technologies aimed. o Tests a series of Smart Grid technologies (including storage systems).

Smart Grids Functions : o Implementation and management of a charging electrical infrastructure, and EV. o Photovoltaic plant supporting charging infrastructure. o Multifunctional Storage: supporting charging infrastructure and MV network

(voltage control & peak shaving). o Customer Information devices.


DEMOS 3 – DG DemoNet, HiT & ZUQDE: Where and planning:

o Salzburg and Upper Austria Regions. (2012-2014).

Key Figures : o DER involved: Hydroelectric and PV (Installed Power: 6,6 MW). o Customers : 20.000 at MV and LV.

Objectives: o Increase DER hosting capacity of MV networks with new voltage control

concepts and active integration of DER network operation. o Increase the DER hosting capacity of LV networks with new control concepts

& active integration of DER.

Smart Grids Functions : o Intelligent Planning: to allow greater density

in the network DRES. o Intelligent monitoring. o Asset management and MV Voltage control

with a economically efficient approach. o Generation and load coordination. o Evaluation of monitoring and control

solutions based on "Smart metering", in networks with high penetration of PV & EV.


DEMO 4 - Zukunftsnetze: Where and planning:

o Bitburg-Prüm and Rheinland-Pfalz Regions. (07/2009-09/2011).

Key Figures : o DER involved: Biogas, Wind and PV (Installed Power: 120 MW). o Customers : 5.600 at MV and LV.

Objectives: o Identification of efficient distribution grid concepts depending on several

conditions of power supply. o Improve the methodology of an asset assessment of operational devices in

MV networks. o Full observability of a MV line with a massive penetration of DER. o Real test demonstration of several solutions in MV grids to ensure the quality

of power supply.

Smart Grids Functions : o Using ICT technologies. o Stabilization of MV generation. o Voltage control in MV. o LV Stabilization. o Energy storage


DEMO 5 - VENTEEA: Where and planning:

o Aube department. (2012-2015).

Key Figures : o DER involved: Wind (Installed Power: 18 MW). o Customers : 3.000 at MV and LV .

Objectives: o Enable the large integration of DER, from a technically and economically point

of view, in the MV distribution networks. o Test different automation and communication solutions to optimize the

integration of wind generation in MV network. o Project focused on DER of significant power (> 1 MW) in rural networks.

Smart Grids Functions : o Voltage and power sensors for real-time

diagnosis. o MV state estimator. o Voltage regulation. o Substation control system for real-time

monitoring MV. o System information exchange to facilitate

RES integration (DEIE) o Devices to transfer field measurements. o Battery 2 MVA (cost-benefit study multi-

owner).


DEMO 6 - DMS support tools :

Where and planning: o Greece. (2013-2014).

Key Figures : o DER involved: PV and Hydroelectric (Installed Power: 28 MW).

Objectives: o Demonstrates and tests the management of the DER installations in the MV

Distribution networks using the smart metering infrastructure considering that they are equipped with AMI connected to the Telemetry Centre.

o Completes a database that contains all data and the necessary geographical information.

o Develops of Forecasting tool focusing on PV forecasting.

Smart Grids Functions : o Probabilistic load flow and state estimation. o Congestion management. o Estimation of hosting capacity for DRES. o Monitoring the quality of supply. o Reduction of network losses.


14

Economical • ICT Solutions in Remote Areas • Distribution Networks update • DSO remuneration

Regulatory • Coordination TSO&DSO • DRES Regulation • DRES incentive

Technical • Interaction New Actors • Lack of Standards • Power System Reliability

Project results: Barriers


BARRIERS TEC REG ECON

The regulation does not allow the DSOs to control DER X

The coordination between TSOs and DSOs is insufficient for the effective DRES integration

X

There is a lack of a proper regulation for DRES connection X

There is a lack of an adequate remuneration for DSO services X

X

DRES do not have any incentive to take part in the network operation X

X

Interactions with the new actors resulting from DRES integration are not clearly defined X

X

There is a lack of a standard Smart Grid solution components X

X

Distribution network processes are not adapted to the realities of the integration of DRES X X

There is a lack of experience of the DSO in the operation of new devices and systems X X

The power system reliability may be affected by the massive DRES penetration X X

The ICT solutions for remote areas may be unaffordable X

Project results: Barriers


time

1·PG(t)

2·PG(t)

4·PG(t)

5·PG(t) Violated constraints

3·PG(t)

Increase of DRES Hosting Capacity

Improvement of quality of supply

A B C

time/distance

EN 5

0160

Voltage profile

Reduction of energy losses

Generation

Losses

Demand

Fraud

KPIs

DRES penetration

Project results: IGREENGrid KPIs


time

1·PG(t)

2·PG(t)

4·PG(t)

5·PG(t) Violated constraints

3·PG(t)

Increase of DRES Hosting Capacity

Project results: KPIs methodology


Project results: Conclusion on the use of KPIs

The use of simulations has allowed the evaluation of Smart Grid solutions performance on demonstrators

• simulation of several scenarios in order to extract more information about the performance (sensitivities, high/low penetration of DG, etc…)

The evaluation of multiple KPIs (in addition to HC increase) allows the extraction of relevant information

• effectiveness in case of voltage congestion • impact of the solutions on different aspects of the

network operation


Project results: …however…

The assumed hypotheses for an harmonized KPI calculation procedure are not accurate representations of the real operation practices for all the demonstrators

• voltage limits / maximum loading of lines • safety reserves for robust network management

Resulting KPIs are strongly dependent on the network nature (rural/urban/etc.) and it is not possible to perform comparison of solutions on the basis of their results

• demonstrators networks have different characteristics • KPIs should be investigated on clustered networks

(representative of the European distribution systems)


Project results: Most promising solutions Functionality Implementation Average score from

qualitative evaluation Votes from DSO

survey

MV Voltage Monitoring (PLF) HIGH 71% (RTU) MEDIUM 57% (SE) MEDIUM 86%

LV Voltage Monitoring

(AMI) HIGH 86% (SE) MEDIUM 29% (AMI+SE) MEDIUM 14% (RTU) MEDIUM 14%

MV Voltage Control

Distributed

with AVR HIGH 57% with OLTC HIGH 71% with OLTC, DG HIGH 86% with DG active power modulation MEDIUM 43% with Local Storage MEDIUM 29%

Supervised with OLTC & DG MEDIUM 57% ( field measurements) with OLTC & DG MEDIUM 43%

Centralised

(field measurements) with OLTC HIGH 71% (SE & OPF) with OLTC HIGH 86% (SE) with OLTC MEDIUM 86% (SE & OPF) with OLTC & DG MEDIUM 57% (SE & OPF) with OLTC & DG active power modulation MEDIUM 29% (SE & OPF) with OLTC & DG & STATCOM MEDIUM 43% (SE & OPF) with OLTC & DG & Storage LOW 29% (SE) with OLTC & DG & Storage LOW 29%

LV Voltage Control

Distributed

with OLTC HIGH 86% with AVR HIGH 43% ( field measurements) with OLTC HIGH 43% with STATCOM HIGH 14% with DG MEDIUM 43% with OLTC , DG MEDIUM 57% with DG active power modulation MEDIUM 43% ( field measurements) with OLTC , DG MEDIUM 43%

Supervised ( field measurements) with OLTC & DG MEDIUM 14% Centralised (SE & OPF) with OLTC & DG & … MEDIUM 0%

MV Congestion Management with DG non-firm grid connection contracts (including DG modulation) MEDIUM 57% with Use of Flexibility (DG, DSM, STR ...) LOW 57%

LV Congestion Management with DG non-firm grid connection contracts (including DG modulation) LOW 43% with Use of Flexibility (DG modulation, DSM, STR ...) LOW 0%


Project results: Scalability and replicability

21

Today Future

Country A

Country B

Country A

Country B


Project results: Scalability and replicability Conclusions

22

• Being qualitative, the SRA is focused on identifying trends, not on selecting a single “most promising” solution from the S&R point of view.

• All implementations can be

considered as valid alternatives depending on network status, regulatory conditions, DSO’s approach...

• Detailed studies are required to choose the best solution: - Technical studies (i.e. based on simulations) on the specific

network - Economic studies (i.e. CBA)


Project results: Techno-Economic analysis

23

BaU – Network reinforcement

MV Distributed Voltage Control

with OLTC

MV Distributed Voltage Control with OLTC, DG

MV Centralized (field

measurements) Voltage Control

with OLTC

MV Supervised (field

measurements) Voltage Control with OLTC & DG

MV Supervised Voltage Control with OLTC & DG

MV Centralized (SE) Voltage

Control with OLTC

MV Centralized (SE & OPF)

Voltage Control with OLTC

MV Centralized (SE & OPF)

Voltage Control with OLTC & DG

€/∆MW

T1 Network Value Unit

Current network data MV Feeder (line) Average MV underground line length (m) 15,756 m HV/MV Primary

Substation Total number of HV/MV units 1 # Number of MV feeders per HV/MV unit 4 #

BaU - Network reinforcement Line (cable) Overhead 58,800 m


Project results: Recommendations to stakeholders

24

Prosumers Generators Investors

Manufacturers Aggregators Retailers

Research centres EEGI European Commission

Standardisation working groups Regulators DSOs

TSOs


Thank You, May 2016

www.igreengrid-fp7.eu

[email protected]

http://www.igreengrid-fp7.eu/�

mailto:[email protected]�

IGREENGrid Project Presentation -...

Documents

Transcript of IGREENGrid Project Presentation -...