Paper published in a book (Scientific congresses and symposiums)
Comparative analysis of dynamic and linear programming energy systems models applied to the Bolivian power system
Huallpara, Alizon; Navia Orellana, Marco Antonio; Gomand, Isalineet al.
2023 • In ECOS 2023 (Ed.) 36th International Conference on Efficiency, Cost, Optimization, Simulation and Environmental Impact of Energy Systems (ECOS 2023)
Dispa-SET Bolivia; Energy system modelling; SDDP; Hydro scheduling
Abstract :
[en] Energy system models are indispensable tools for energy planning and decision making. They identify the most cost-effective way of delivering energy to the final consumer. No one tool that addresses all the energy systemrelated issues. Every model has its own strengths and limitations and serves a different purpose. This paper aims to compare the capabilities of two different model formulations to model both the hydro scheduling and the short-term dispatch problems in hydro-dominated power systems. On the one hand, SDDP, a commercial model for hydrothermal generation scheduling with a representation of the transmission network, has been used by the Bolivian system operator for dispatch simulations. Conversely, Dispa-SET, an open-source unit commitment and economic dispatch model with mid-term hydrothermal coordination capability, has been used previously in several Bolivian case studies. In this paper, both models were applied to the same input dataset of the Bolivian electric system considering probabilistic results for 43 weather years from 1984 to 2021. SDDP optimizes the system under all weather years, while Dispa-SET optimises under one full year, for which 43 runs were made. The results show that SDDP generation, reservoir level and spillage fall into the ranges of Dispa-SET results. Some differences that are present mainly lie in the conceptualization of the methods of both models. SDDP prioritizes the dispatch of hydro units, while Dispa-SET, with a higher temporal and technical resolution, maximizes the use of non-dispatchable units such as variable renewables and run-of-river.
Research Center/Unit :
Integrated and Sustainable Energy Systems (ISES, ULIEGE) Group for the Research on Renewable Energy Systems (grres, ULPGC)
Disciplines :
Energy
Author, co-author :
Huallpara, Alizon; UMSS - Universidad Mayor de San Simón [BO]
SIDA - Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency
Funding text :
The authors acknowledge ENDE Corporation for their support and access to SDDP simulation results. We are
acknowledged for the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency financial support.
J. D. Sachs, G. Schmidt-Traub, M. Mazzucato, D. Messner, N. Nakicenovic, and J. Rockström, “Six transformations to achieve the sustainable development goals,” Nature Sustainability, vol. 2, no. 9, p. 805-814, 2019. Cited by: 574.
A. Papavasiliou, Y. Mou, L. Cambier, and D. Scieur, “Application of stochastic dual dynamic programming to the real-time dispatch of storage under renewable supply uncertainty,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 9, no. 2, p. 547-558, 2018. Cited by: 63.
C. Allen, G. Metternicht, and T. Wiedmann, “National pathways to the sustainable development goals (sdgs): A comparative review of scenario modelling tools,” Environmental Science and Policy, vol. 66, p. 199-207, 2016. Cited by: 149; All Open Access, Green Open Access.
M. de Medio Ambiente y Aguas Autoridad Plurinacional de la Madre Tierra, “Nationally determined contribution (ndc) of the plurinational state of bolivia: Ndcs update for the 2021-2030 period within the framework of paris agreement,” 2021.
S. Pfenninger, A. Hawkes, and J. Keirstead, “Energy systems modeling for twenty-first century energy challenges,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 33, pp. 74-86, 2014.
S. Pfenninger, J. DeCarolis, L. Hirth, S. Quoilin, and I. Staffell, “The importance of open data and software: Is energy research lagging behind?,” Energy Policy, vol. 101, pp. 211-215, 2017.
L. M. Hall and A. R. Buckley, “A review of energy systems models in the uk: Prevalent usage and categorisation,” Applied Energy, vol. 169, pp. 607-628, 2016.
A. R. de Queiroz, “Stochastic hydro-thermal scheduling optimization: An overview,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 62, pp. 382-395, 2016.
M. G. Prina, G. Manzolini, D. Moser, B. Nastasi, and W. Sparber, “Classification and challenges of bottom-up energy system models - a review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 129, 2020. Cited by: 93; All Open Access, Green Open Access, Hybrid Gold Open Access.
J. Priesmann, L. Nolting, and A. Praktiknjo, “Are complex energy system models more accurate? an intramodel comparison of power system optimization models,” Applied Energy, vol. 255, p. 113783, 2019.
K. S. Gjerden, A. Helseth, B. Mo, and G. Warland, “Hydrothermal scheduling in norway using stochastic dual dynamic programming; a large-scale case study,” in 2015 IEEE Eindhoven PowerTech, pp. 1-6, IEEE, 2015.
M. Pavičević, M. De Felice, S. Busch, I. Hidalgo González, and S. Quoilin, “Water-energy nexus in african power pools - the dispa-set africa model,” Energy, vol. 228, p. 120623, 2021.
S. Zarate, M. Villazón, M. Navia, S. L. Balderrama Subieta, and S. Quoilin, “Modeling hydropower to assess its contribution to flexibility services in the bolivian power system,” 2021.
C. N. de Despacho de Carga, “Memoria anual 2021,” 2022.
C. N. de Despacho de Carga, “Programación de mediano plazo en el sistema interconectado nacional,” 2022.
M. de Hidrocarburos y Energía, “Plan eléctrico del estado plurinacional de bolivia 2025,” 2014.
E. Transmisión, “Memoria anual 2021,” 2022.
R. A. Rojas Candia, S. L. Balderrama Subieta, J. A. Araoz Ramos, V. Senosiain Miquélez, J. F. H. Peña Balderrama, J. G., and S. Quoilin, “Techno-economic assessment of high variable renewable energy penetration in the bolivian interconnected electric system,” International Journal of Sustainable Energy Planning and Management, vol. 22, 2019.
M. Navia, R. Orellana, S. Zaráte, M. Villazón, S. Balderrama, and S. Quoilin, “Energy transition planning with high penetration of variable renewable energy in developing countries: The case of the bolivian interconnected power system,” Energies, vol. 15, no. 3, 2022.
C. Rougé and A. Tilmant, “Using stochastic dual dynamic programming in problems with multiple near-optimal solutions,” Water Resources Research, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 4151-4163, 2016.
M. Pavičević, A. Mangipinto, W. Nijs, F. Lombardi, K. Kavvadias, J. P. Jiménez Navarro, E. Colombo, and S. Quoilin, “The potential of sector coupling in future european energy systems: Soft linking between the dispa-set and jrc-eu-times models,” Applied Energy, vol. 267, p. 115100, 2020.
G. G. Pétursson, K. Jónasson, E. Benedikt Hreinsson, and Linnet, “A comparison of two hydro scheduling algorithms, sddp and lpsim,” in 2013 48th International Universities' Power Engineering Conference (UPEC), pp. 1-5, 2013.
A. de Fiscalización y Control Social de Electricidad, “Resolución ae nº0216/2012,” 2012.
A. Helseth, M. Fodstad, M. Askeland, B. Mo, O. B. Nilsen, J. I. Pérez-Díaz, M. Chazarra, and I. Guisández, “Assessing hydropower operational profitability considering energy and reserve markets,” IET Renewable Power Generation, vol. 11, no. 13, pp. 1640-1647, 2017.