Supply and Demand

Supply and Demand
METU
Itaipu: 12600 MW, Cap. Fac.: 84 %

Supply and
Demand
EE 710 Electricity Trading, Electrical and Electronics Eng. Dept., METU, Spring 2007, Prof. Dr. Osman SEVAIOGLU, Page 1
Supply and Demand
METU
Supply-Demand Balance
Basic Conditions for System Itaipu Penstocks
Operation
A basic condition of system
operation is that electricity
cannot be stored
This means that;
a) electricity must be
consumed immediately,
while it is being generated
Supply and Demand
METU
An Implication of the above Condition Immediate Generation and Consumption
a) electricity must be consumed

Pg1
immediately, while it is being Pl1
generated by the same amount
Transmission
Pg2 Pl2
Hence; and
Distribution
Energy supplied must always be equal System
Pg3 Pl3
to consumed
This means that; Pgk Pln
b) consumed electricity must always
be equal to generated electricity + +
The above condition is called;  Pgi = PLosses +  Pli
“Supply-Demand Balance”
Sum of generations = Sum of loads + losses
Supply and Demand
METU
Supply – Demand Balance Teknecik Power Plant
Supply-Demand Balance must always be 27.10.2009
maintained;
• in real-time,
• under all system operating conditions
Basic principle for maintaining supply-
demand balance;
Keep always sufficient amount of spare
generation, transmission or distribution capacity
for a sudden, unexpected contingency(*)
------------------
(*) Contingency: Sudden loss of a generation, transmission or
distribution capacity due to an unexpected line or transformer opening
Prof. Dr. SEVAİOĞLU, Plant Chief. Eng. Kamil DİREL

Supply and Demand
METU
Supply – Demand Balance İskenderun-Sugözü
470 MW 300 MW
Transmission 200 MW
250 MW and
Distribution System 1270 MW
1200 MW
150 MW
+ +
 Pgi = 1920 MW = PLosses +  Pli = 1920 MW
Total Supply = Total Demand + Losses

 Pgi =  Pli + Plosses
Dr. SEVAİOĞLU, Yavuz ÖZLER, Seyhan KARABULUT, Sugözü Power Plant, 08.11.2004
Supply and Demand
METU
Why should Supply-Demand Balance be Maintained

Supply – Demand Balance Francis Turbine – Generator (T-G)
470 MW 300 MW
Transmission 200 MW
250 MW and
Distribution System 1270 MW
1200 MW
150 MW
+ +
 Pgi = 1920 MW = PLosses +  Pli = 1920 MW
Shaft Water Flow
In case that supply demand balance is

disturbed, the difference power is cumulated
or absorbed in/from the shaft of the T-G
System, thus leading to over/under-frequency
Supply and Demand
METU
Total Supply = Total Demand + Losses Supply – Demand Balance
 Pgi =  Pli + Plosses
• System frequency is mainly determined Pg1 Pl1
by supply-demand balance Transmission
• A deviation in system frequency is an Pg2 and Pl2
indication of supply-demand unbalance Distribution
Pg3 System Pl3
Pgk Pln
+ +
 Pgi = PLosses +  Pli

Generation control center
Supply and Demand
METU
Keeping Frequency Constant

Generation Control Center Condition for keeping frequency constant
470 MW 300 MW
Transmission
and 200 MW
250 MW Distribution
System 1270 MW
1200 MW 150 MW
+ +
 Pgi = 1920 MW = Plosses= 10 MW +  Pli = 1910 MW
Total Supply > Total Demand + Losses f ↑,
 Pgi >  Pli + Plosses (Overfrequency)
V↑, (Overvoltage)
Total Supply < Total Demand + Losses f ↓, (Underfrequency)
 Pgi <  Pli + Plosses V↓, (Undervoltage)
Supply and Demand
METU
Keeping Frequency Constant: Real Example

Load Profile Supply-Demand Unbalance
December 30, 2005 - Hour: 21:56 Cizre Kurtalan
Region Mean Peak 120 MW 154 kV 30 MW
477 mcm 120 MW 34 MW 154 kV
(MW) (MW)
Zakhu 48.0 68.6
Dahuk 68.0 97.1
Rashidiyah 45.0 64.3 30 MW Company Mobile-1/1-7
7x 6 = 42 MW
Total 230.0
28 MW Company Mobile-2/1-5
Cizre 120.0 TEİAŞ 154 kV 5 x 6 = 30 MW
Kurtalan 34.0 PS-3 TM
27 MW Silopi: 6 MW
Mobil-1 30.0 Uludere: 21 MW
Mobil-2 28.0
Mobil-3 25.0 Company 154 kV TM
Mobil-4 20.0 25 MW Company Mobile-3/1-3

3 x 10.3 = 31 MW
Total 257.0 20 MW Company Mobile-4/1-4
Silopi 6.0 4 x 6 = 24 MW
Uludere 21.0
Zakhu 230.0 154 kV Zakhu: 55 MW
230 MW Dahuk: 70-80 MW
Total 257.0
Rashidiyah: 50 MW
Deficiency (MW) 0.0
Supply and Demand
METU

477 mcm 154 MW 0 MW 154 kV
(MW) (MW)
Zakhu 48.0 68.6
Dahuk 68.0 97.1
This line protected by an overcurrent 30 MW Company Mobile-1/1-7
Rashidiyah 45.0 64.3
relay, so to allow 150 MW maximum 7x 6 = 42 MW
Total 230.0
Cizre 134.0 5 x 6 = 30 MW
TEİAŞ 154 kV
Kurtalan 0.0 PS-3 TM
27 MW Silopi: 6 MW
Mobil-2 28.0
Mobil-3 25.0 Karkey 154 kV TM

3 x 10.3 = 31 MW
Silopi 6.0 4 x 6 = 24 MW
Uludere 21.0
Zahku 230.0 154 kV Zakhu: 55 MW
Total 257.0
Rashidiyah: 50 MW
Deficiency (MW) 0.0
Supply and Demand
METU

477 mcm 0 MW 0 MW 154 kV
(MW) (MW)
Zakhu 48.0 68.6
Dahuk 68.0 97.1
Isolated Region (Island) 30 MW
Rashidiyah 45.0 64.3 Company Mobile-1/1-7
7x 6 = 42 MW
Total 230.0
Cizre 0.0 5 x 6 = 30 MW
TEİAŞ 154 kV
Kurtalan 0.0
PS-3 TM 27 MW Silopi: 6 MW
Mobil-2 28.0
Karkey 154 kV TM
Mobil-3 25.0
3 x 10.3 = 31 MW
Silopi 6.0 4 x 6 = 24 MW
Uludere 21.0
Zakhu 230.0 154 kV Zakhu: 55 MW
Total 257.0
Rashidiyah: 50 MW
Deficiency (MW) -154.0
Supply and Demand
METU

Karadeniz Enerji Mobile Plant Loss of Frequency
Şırnak, Silopi - 120 MW
50.0
Frequency
49.0
48.0
47.0
(49-47) / 0.7 Hz /sec = 2.85 Hz / Sec.

Duration = 3.85 Sec.
46.0
Supply and Demand
METU
Load Duration Curve

Load Duration Curve is the sorted form of the Daily Loading Curve
40 40
Total Demand P(t) (MW)

35 35
30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
Sorted
wrt power
10 10
5 5
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time (hours) Duration (hours)
The net areas under the curves (Energy consumptions) The ratio of the shaded area to overall
rectangular area is the Capacity Factor of
are the same the Load expressed in (%)
Supply and Demand
METU
Annual Load Duration Curve

Load Duration Curve Nuh Energy Plant
(120 + 38 MW, Kocaeli)
The net areas under the daily
loading and load duration curves
are the same
Hence, similar to Daily Loading
Curve, the area under the Load
Duration Curve represents the
total annual energy consumption
of the consumer
Supply and Demand
METU
Load Duration Curve

Load Duration Curve Annual Load Duration Curve
Daily Loading Curves for one year 40

may be combined and sorted 35
together to yield the “Annual Load

30
Duration Curve” or simply; “Load
Duration Curve” 25
The horizontal axis is scaled by a 20
factor of; 1 / 8765(*), in order to make 15

the scope of the abcissa to be in a Energy consumed
10
range between 0 and 1.0
5
-----------------
(*) One year = 365 x 24 + 5 = 8765 hours
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%) /100
Supply and Demand
METU
Load Duration Curve

Load Duration Curve Solar (Concentrated) Power Plant
Vertical and horizontal axes of the
Load Duration Curve are power
and time (duration), respectively
After scaling, however, duration
becomes dimensionless
Supply and Demand
METU
Load Duration Curve

Load Duration Curve Application
Load Duration Curve specifies 40

the time duration in which the 35
load remains above a certain Energy supplied = Area
power level in a year 30
For instance, demand remains 25

23
above 23 MW loading level only 20
within a period of 20 % in a year

15
i.e. only:
Duration = d = 0.2 = 20 %
0.2 x 8765 = 1753 hours / year 10
= 8765 * % 20 = 1753 hours /year
Power demand = 23 MW 5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Load Duration Curve

Similarly, demand remains above 40

30 MW loading level only within a 35
Energy supplied = Area
period of 5 % in a year 30
i.e. only:
0.05 x 8765 = 438.3 hours / year 25
20
Power demand = 30 MW
15 Duration = d = 0.05 = 5 %
= 8765 x % 5 = 438.3 hours/year
10
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Load Duration Curve

Since demand remains above 30 40

Area-1
MW loading level only within a 35
Energy supplied by a plant with
relatively more expensive variable
period of 5 % in a year, i.e. only: cost, but cheaper fixed cost
0.05 x 8765 = 438.3 hours / year 30 Area-2

Energy supplied by a plant with
This part of the demand may be 25 relatively cheaper variable cost, but
more expensive expensive fixed cost
supplied by a plant with a relatively 20
more expensive variable cost, but
cheaper fixed cost 15
Duration = d = 0.05 = 5 %
Since the area under the Load 10 = 8765 x % 5 = 438.3 hours/year
Duration Curve is energy, Area-1

5
and Area-2 represent the energies
supplied by plants with relatively 0
more expensive and cheaper 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Duration (%)/100
1.0
variable costs, respectively

Supply and Demand
METU
Capacity Factor is the same as the Percentage Duration
Definition Application
Now, consider a plant supplying 40

energy, represented by an horizontal 30
strip on the Load Duration Curve with
an hight Pslice and duration d on the 30
∆P
load duration 25
This strip is called “Demand Slice”

20
15
Duration = d
10
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU

40

Claim
Duration of the operation is the 30
same as Capacity Factor of that 30

plant ∆P
Total energy that can be supplied 25
by the plant is the overall hatched

20
area (blue area + red area), i.e. the
overall rectangular area in the 15
“Demand Slice” Duration = d
Energy supplied by the plant, on 10
the other hand, is only the blue 5

hatched area
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU

40
Proof of the Claim

30
Capacity factor may be then written
as; 30
∆P
Capacity Factor = Actual energy supplied/
overall energy that can be supplied 25
(Capacity) of the plant;
20
or
c = Blue area / (Blue area + Red area)
15
= ∆P x d / ∆P x Overall duration Duration = d
= ∆P x d / ∆P x 1
10
=d/1 =d
Conclusion; 5
Capacity Factor is the same as the 0

percentage duration of operation i.e.; 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
d=c Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Unit Commitment
Definition Baymina Combined Cycle Gas
Plant Tractabel, Ankara, Maliköy,
Unit commitment is the scheduling of plants 770 MW, 6,3 billion kWh/Year
with different fixed, variable costs and
generating capacities, in order to meet the
demand in the most economical way in real time
Gas Plant 40 MW
Transmission
50 MW
and/or
Hydroelectric Distribution
Plant System
80 MW
Supply and Demand
METU
Unit Commitment
Example Baymina Combined Cycle Gas Plant
Tractabel, Ankara, Maliköy, 770 MW, 6,3
Consider two plants supplying a single billion kWh/Year
demand
Please note that;
• Capacity of each plant is sufficient to meet
the total demand, implying that the
example is an unconstrained optimization
problem,
• Solution of the constrained problem is
more complicated
Gas Plant
40 MW
50 MW Transmission
and/or
Hydroelectric Distribution System
Plant
80 MW
Supply and Demand
METU
Unit Commitment – Example 1

Problem Fixed and Variable Costs
Plant Fixed Variable
Determine the optimum generation schedule
Cost -FCC Cost –VC
for the two-plant system shown below.
Fixed and variable costs of the plants are ($/MWh) ($/MWh)
given as shown on the RHS diagram Advanced Nuclear 23.88 4.16
Daily Loading and Load Duration Curves for
the load are given in the next pages Coal 14.10 11.77
Wind Turbine 13.85 5.0
Two plants supplying a single demand
Gas Turbine (Combined 7.36 20.78
Cycle)
40 MW Gas Turbine (Simplex) 4.75 34.40

Gas Plant
50 MW Transmission Hydroelectric 17.0 6.0
and/or
Plant
System
80 MW
Supply and Demand
METU

Problem Screening Curves
45
Now, plot the screening curves of the
Combined Capacity Cost ($/MWh)

plants on the same scale 40
35
Fixed and Variable Costs
30
Cost -FCC Cost –VC 25
($/MWh) ($/MWh) 20
Hydroelectric 17.0 6.0

15
Gas Turbine (Combined 7.36 20.78
10
Cycle)
5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

Daily Loading Curve Load Duration Curve
Total Demand (MW)
40.0 40.0
Total Demand (MW)

38.0 38.0
36.0 36.0
34.0 34.0
32.0 32.0
30.0 30.0
28.0 28.0
26.0 26.0
24.0 24.0
22.0 22.0
20.0 20.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Hours Hours
Supply and Demand
METU

Solution Load Duration Curve
40.0
Total Demand (MW)

An analytical expression for the load duration
curve may be obtained by matching up the Load 38.0
Duration Curve with a fourth order interpolating 36.0
polynomial using the WLS algorithm(*) 34.0
32.0 Load Duration Curve

Interpolating Polynomial
30.0
Interpolating Polynomial
P(x) = a0 + a1 x +a2 x2 + a3 x3 + a4 x4 28.0
26.0
a0 40.287388320401500000 * 1
24.0
a1 -1.486402987869950000 * x
22.0
a2 0.264259932969821000 * x2
20.0
a3 -0.019184181912791600 * x3

a4 0.000404328305377399 * x4 2
----------------------------------- 0
WLS Algoithm: Ref.: Injtroduction to Numerical Analysis, C. E. FRÖBERG, 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Addison-Wesley, First Printing 1970, Page: 336 Hours
Supply and Demand
METU
Solution Screening Curves

45

Commit the plants with respect to their
fixed and variable costs and the 40
optimum capacity factor by 35
intersecting the screening curves 30
Two plants supplying a single demand 25
20
Gas Plant 40 MW 15
50 MW Transmission
and/or 10
Plant System 5 Optimum capacity factor
80 MW
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU
Solution
Optimum capacity factor is the
intersection of the two screening
curves
Optimum capacity factor in the
present example is 0.5
• Gas plant;
is preferable when
0  c  0.5
• Hydroelectric plant:
is also committed (in addition
to gas plant) when
0.5  c  1.0
Supply and Demand
METU

45

Solution 40
35
Now, by mapping the optimum capacity 30
factor found in the previous step, on the 25

20
horizontal axis of the Load Duration Curve, 15
the optimal capacities for the gas and 10
hydroelectric plants are found 5

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
40
Power output of gas plant 38
Energy supplied by gas plant 36
34
Power output of hydroelectric plant 32
Energy supplied by hydroelectric plant 30
Demand (MW)
28
Gas plant alternative is preferable when 26
24
capacity factor is between zero and 0.5, 22
20
Hydroelectric plant alternative is also

committed (in addition to gas plant) when 2

0
capacity factor exceeds 0.5 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

40
Demand (MW)
Solution 38
Energy supplied
by gas plant
The resulting plant loadings are shown on 36
Energy supplied
the RHS 34 by hydroelectric
plant
32
Gas plant alternative must be preferred
30
when capacity factor is between 0 and 0.5, 28
and hydroelectric plant is also committed
26
(in addition to gas plant) when capacity
24
factor is above 0.5
22
Hydroelectric plant is loaded for power 20
output up to 36 MW, and then the gas plant 
is loaded between 36 - 40 MW, i.e. by 4 MW, 2

0
(in addition to hydroelectric plant)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

45

Solution 40
35
c = 0.5 30
Then, find the power output of each 25

20
plant with respct to the capacity factor 15
c = 0.5, as found above 10

5
0
Phydroelectric = 36.0 MW 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Pgas = 4.0 MW 40
Demand (MW)
38
36
32
30
28
26
Gas Plant 40 MW
Transmission 24
50 MW 22
and/or 20

Plant System 2
80 MW 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

45

Solution 40
35
Now, calculate the average cost of 30
electricity, with respect to the fixed 25

20
and variable costs of gas and 15
hydroelectric plants as given in the 10
previous table 5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Demand (MW)
38
36
34
32
40 MW 30
Gas Plant Transmission 28
50 MW 26
and/or
24
Hydroelectric Distribution 22
Plant System 20
80 MW

2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

45

Solution 40
35
This part of the question is solved by integrating the 30

25
load duration curve of each plant with respect to the 20
capacity factor, i.e. electricity supplied by each plant 15
10
Let, 5
E1 = Energy supplied by gas plant, 0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
E2 = Energy supplied by hydroelectric plant 40
Demand (MW)
38
0.5 x 24
E1 = 
36
P(c) dc – (36 x 0.5 x 24 hours) 34
0 32
30
24 28
E2 =  P(c) dc – E1 26
24
0 22
20

P (c) = a0 + a1 c +a2 c2 + a3 c3 + a4 c4 2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Please note that the integration limits are [ 0 , 24 hours ], not [ 0, 1 ] Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

45

Solution 40
35
Now, we need to calculate the integral of P(c) 30

25
with respect to c, over the interval: 0, 0.5x24 20
15
0.5 x 24
E1 =  P(c) dc – (36 x 0.5 x 24 hours) 10
0 5
0.5 x 24
0
= (a0 + a1c + a2 c2 + a3 c3 + a4 c4 ) dc – 432 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
0 40
Demand (MW)
12
38
= [ a0 c + a1 c2 / 2 +a2 c3 / 3 + a3 c4 / 4 + a4 c5 / 5 ] - 432 36
0 34
32
= a0 12 + a1 12 2 / 2 + a2 12 3 / 3 + a3 12 4 / 4 30
28
+ a4 12 5 / 5 - 432 26
24
= 449.31 – 432.00 = 17.31 MWh 22
20

2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

45

Solution 40
35
24
30
E2 =  P(c) dc – E1 25
0 20
24 15
=  (a0 + a1 c +a2 c2 + a3 c3 + a4 c4) dc – E1 10
0 5
24 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
= [ a0 c + a1 c2 / 2 +a2 c3 / 3 + a3 c4 / 4 + a4 c5 / 5 ] - E1 Capacity Factor (c)
0 40
Demand (MW)
38
= a0 24 + a1 24 2 / 2 + a2 24 3 / 3 + a3 24 4 / 4 36
34
+ a4 24 5 / 5 - E1 32
30
28
= 809.21 – 17.31 = 791.90 MWh 26
24
22
20

2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

45

Fixed, Variable and Total Costs 40
35
E1 = Energy supplied by gas plant, 30

25
= 17.31 MWh 20
E2 = Energy supplied by hydroelectric plant 15
= 791.90 MWh 10
5
Plant Fixed Variable 0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Cost FCC Cost VC Capacity Factor (c)
($/MWh) ($/MWh) 40
Demand (MW)
38
Gas Turbine (Combined Cycle) 8.00 25.00 36
34
Hydroelectric 20.00 4.0 32
30
28
26
24
22
Please note that fixed costs are the charges 20
reflected to the customer regardless of the

2
consumption, i.e. regardless of the capacity 0
factor 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

Fixed and Variable Costs of Gas Plant
Formula:
CCC = Cost / kWh = FCC + c x VCC ($ / MWh)
Total Daily Cost = TDC = CCC x Daily capacity
= (FCC + c x VCC) Sday
= FCC x Sday + VCC x c x Sday ($/day)
40 40
Demand (MW)
Demand (MW)
38 38
36 36
34 34
32 32
30 30
28 28
26 26
24 24
22 22
20 20


2 2
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c) Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

Fixed and Variable Costs of Hydroelectric Plant
Formula:
CCC = Cost / kWh = FCC + c x VCC ($ / MWh)
Total Daily Cost = TDC = CCC x Daily capacity
= (FCC + c x VCC) Sday
= FCC x Sday + VCC x c x Sday ($/day)
40 40
38 38
36 36
34 34
32 32
Demand (MW)
Demand (MW)
30 30
28 28
26 26
24 24
22 22
20 20

2 2
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Supply and Demand
METU

45

Daily Fixed Costs 40
35
Plant Fixed Cost FCC 30
($/MWh) 25
20
Gas Turbine (Combined Cycle) 7.36 15
10
Hydroelectric 17.0 5
0
Daily Fixed Cost of Gas Plant = FCG 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
FCG = FCCG x Daily Capacity 40
38
= 7.36 $/MWh x 4 MW x 24 h 36
34
= 706.56 $
Demand (MW)
32
30
28
Daily Fixed Cost of Hydroelectric Plant = FCH 26

24
22
FCH = FCCH x Daily Capacity 20
= 17.00 $/MWh x 36 MW x 24 h 
2
0
= 14,688.00 $ 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

45

Daily Variable Costs 40
35
Plant Variable Cost VC 30
($/MWh) 25
20
Gas Turbine (Combined Cycle) 20.78 15
10
Hydroelectric 6.0 5
0
Daily Variable Cost of Gas Plant = VCG 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
40
VCG = VCG x Daily Generation
Demand (MW)
38
= 20.78 $ / MWh x 17.31 MWh 36

34
= 359.75 $ 32
30
28
Daily Variable Cost of Hydroelectric Plant = VCH 26
24
22
VCH = VCH x Daily Generation 20

= 6.0 $ / MWh x 791.90 MWh 2

0
= 4,751.40 $ 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

Daily Average Cost
Daily Average Cost of Electricity of Gas Plant
ACG = ( FCG + VCG ) / E1
= ( 706.56 + 359.75 ) $ / 17.31 MWh
= 61.60 $ / MWh = 6.16 Cent / kWh
Daily Average Cost of Electricity of Hydroelectric Plant
ACH = (FCH + VCH) / E2
= (14,688.00 + 4,751.40) / 791.90
= 24.5477 $ / MWh = 2.45 Cent / kWh
Daily Average Cost of Electricity
AC = ((FCG + VCG) +(FCH + VCH)) / ( E1 + E2 )
= (1,066.31 + 19,439.40 ) / (17.31 + 791.90)
= 20,505.71 $ / 809.21 MW = 25.34 $ / MWh = 2.53 Cent/kWh
Supply and Demand
METU

Non-Optimal Cases Atatürk HPP 2400 MW
Now, Consider again the system given in
Example 1.
Commit the plants in such a way that only gas
or only hydroelectric plant is put in service
Then, show that the average cost of electricity
for these cases comes out to be greater than
that found in Example 1, implying that the
solution found in Example 1 is indeed optimal
Gas Plant 40 MW
50 MW Transmission
Hydroelectric
and/or
Plant Distribution
80 MW
System
Supply and Demand
METU

40
Non-Optimal Cases
Demand (MW)
38
Energy
Consider first the case, where only gas 36 supplied by
gas plant
plant is put in service 34
32
Capacity Factor gas = Area /(40 x 24 hours)
30
= 809.21 / 960 = 83.77 % 28
Capacity Factor hydroelectric = 0 26
24
Daily Fixed Cost of Gas Plant = FCG 22
FCG = FCCG x Daily Capacity 20
= 7.36 $/MWh x40 MW x24 h = 7065.60 $


2
Daily Variable Cost of Gas Plant = VCG 0
VCG = VCG x Daily Generation 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
= 20.78 $/MWh x 809.21 MWh = 16,815.38 $
Supply and Demand
METU

40
Demand (MW)
Non-Optimal Cases 38
Energy
36 supplied by
Daily Average Cost of Electricity of Gas Plant gas plant
34
ACG = ( FCG + VCG ) / E1 32
= ( 7065.60 + 16,815.38 ) $ / 809.21 MWh 30
= 23,880.98 $ / 809.21 MWh = 29.51 $ / MWh 28
= 2.95 Cents / kWh > 2.53 Cents / kWh 26
24
Optimal Solution 22
20

2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU

40
Non-Optimal Cases
Demand (MW)
38
Energy
Now, consider the case, where only 36 supplied by
hydroelectric
hydroelectric plant is put in service 34 plant
32
Capacity Factor hydroelectric = Area /(40 x 24 hours)
30
= 809.21 / 960 = 83.77 % 28
Capacity Factor gas = 0 26
24
Daily Fixed Cost of Hydroelectric Plant = FCH 22
FCH = FCCH x Daily Capacity 20
= 17.00 $/MWh x 40 MW x24 h = 16,320.00 $


2
Daily Variable Cost of Hydroelectric Plant = VCH 0
VCH = VCG x Daily Generation 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
= 6.00 $/MWh x 809.21 MWh = 4,855.26 $
Supply and Demand
METU

Non-Optimal Cases Çan Thermal PP (2 x 160 MW)
Daily Average Cost of Electricity of Hydroelectric
Plant
ACH = ( FCH + VCH ) / E2
= ( 16,320.00 + 4855.26 ) $ / 809.21 MWh
= 21,175.26 $ / 809.21 MWh = 26.167 $ / MWh
= 2.62 Cents / kWh > 2.53 Cents / kWh 40
Demand (MW)
38
36 Energy supplied by
hydroelectric plant
34
Optimal Solution 32
30
28
26
Hence, the solution found in Example 1 is indeed 24
22
the optimal solution 20

2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU
Variable Cost of Plants

Unit Commitment Screening Curves
45
Derivative of the CCC with respect to

40
Capacity factor (c) is “Variable Cost 35

30
(VC)” of the plant 25
20
d/dc CCC = d/dc (FCC + VC x c) 15

10
0
= d/dc FCC + d/dc VC x c 5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
= VC 8
Capacity Factor (c)
Variable Cost (VC) (Cent /kwh)

25
7
Variable Cost of Gas Plant
20 6
Slope = Variable Cost - VC
5
Variable Cost-VC
Variable Cost of Hydroelectric Plant

15 4
10 3
2
5 1
Fixed Cost-FCC
0
0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Capacity Factor (c)
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU
Integral of Variable Cost Curve

Unit Commitment Total Variable Costs
8
Total Variable Cost (VC) (Cent /kwh)

Integral of (area under the) variable 7
Cost Curve is the Combined Capacity 6 Total VC of Gas Plant
Cost Curve (CCC) or simply Screening

5
4 Total VC of Hydroelectric Plant
Curve 3
2
∫ VC(c) dc + FCC = CCC (c) 1

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
25
20 Combined Capacity Costs

45

40
Variable Cost-VC
15
35
30
10
25
20
5 15
Fixed Cost-FCC 10
5
0
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Supply and Demand
METU
Unit Commitment - Homework

Question (Homework) Screening Curves

45
How would the price vary, when the
capacity of the hydroelectric plant were 40
reduced to 12 MW, i.e. not sufficient to 35
meet the load ? 30
Optimum Capacity factor is again % 50 25
15
10
40 MW
Gas Plant
50 MW Transmission 5
and/or
Hydroelectric Distribution 0
Plant System 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
80 MW Capacity Factor (c)
Optimum capacity factor
Supply and Demand
METU
Approaches in Unit Commitment

Prediction of Prices
An essential information for unit
commitment is market prices
Plants will be committed, if the plant
owners expect profit, and will be shut
down, if it appears to be more
profitable than running
Day-ahead prices published by the
system operator give a very reliable
hint about tomorrow prices
The safe course is to have the system
operator provide the unit commitment
service and make it optional to all
participants PJM (Pennsilvania-New Jersey-Maryland)
Model
Supply and Demand
METU
Alternative Approaches in Unit Commitment

How will the Unit Commitment
Service be Carried out ?
In principle, Unit Commitment Service
may be carried out by three alternative
ways;
• by a centrally operated operator
service (a less liberal approach),
• by a private (regional or general)
market,
• by the plant itself
The service simply orders generators;
• when to start up,
• how much to produce at each instant
of time, and
• when to shut down
Supply and Demand
METU
Unit Commitment
Example 2 - Three Plant Case Screening Curves
Calculate the annual average cost of 45

electricity for the following three plant 40
case 35
Three plants supplying a single demand

30
25
Gas Plant
20 MW 20
40 MW
Transmission
Fuel Oil Plant and/or 15
30 MW Distribution
System 10
Hydroelectric
Plant
40 MW 5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU
Unit Commitment

45
By mapping the intersection points of the 40
screening curves on the horizontal axis of 35
the Load Duration Curve, optimal capacity of 30

25
each plant may be found 20
15
Three plants supplying a single demand 10
5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Gas Plant Capacity Factor (c)
20 MW 40

40 MW
Transmission 35
Fuel Oil Plant and/or 30

30 MW Distribution 25
Hydroelectric
System 20
Plant 15
40 MW 10
5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)
Supply and Demand
METU
Unit Commitment
Fuel oil plant
45

40
is preferable when capacity factor is 35
0  c  0.13 30
25
Gas plant 20
is also committed when capacity factor is 15
0.13  c  0.91 10
5
Hydroelectric plant 0
is also committed when capacity factor is 40
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
0.93  c  1.00 35
30
Power output of fuel oil plant 25
Energy supplied by fuel oil plant
20
Power output of gas plant 15
Energy supplied by gas plant 10
5
Power output of hydroelectric plant
0
Energy supplied by hydroelectric plant 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)
Supply and Demand
METU

45
Derivative of the CCC with respect to

40
Capacity factor (c) yields “Variable 35
(Marginal) Cost (VC)” of the plant 30

25
20

0 10

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
= VC 8
Capacity Factor (c)

7
25
6 VC of Fuel Oil Plant
20
Slope = Variable Cost - VC VC of Hydroelectric Plant
5
Variable Cost-VC
15 4
3
10
2
5 1
Fixed Cost-FCC
0
0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU
Integral of Variable Cost Curve

Solution Combined Capacity Costs
Integral of (area under the) Variable 8
Variable Cost (VC) (Cent /kwh)

7
Cost Curve is the “Combined Capacity 6
CCC of Fuel Oil
Plant
Cost Curve (CCC)” or simply the 5
CCC of Fuel Oil
Hydroelectric Plant
Screening Curve 4
3
∫ VC(c) dc + FCC = CCC (c) 2
1
25
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
20 Capacity Factor (c)
Combined Capacity Cost(CCC) ($/MWh)

Slope = Variable Cost - VC 45
40 Fuel Oil Plant
15 Variable Cost-VC Hydroelectric Plant
35
30
10 25
20
Fixed Cost-FCC
5 15
10
0 5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0
Capacity Factor (c) 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU
Energy Costs
Solution Multi-Plant Commitment
Rule: Please note that plants with higher fixed costs and
lower variable costs are placed in tha base level,
Each slice on the Load Duration Curve while the others are placed in the peak level
represent energy supplied by a plant 40

Energy supplied by Fuel
with more expensive variable cost than 35 Oil Plant
those supplying the strips laid below Energy supplied by Gas
30 Plant
Variable Costs: 25
Energy supplied by
Hydroelectric Plant
VChydroelectric < VCGas < VCFuel Oil 20
Plants laid on the top of the curve are 15
called “Peaker Plants” or simply 10

“Peaker”
Peaker plants have relatively higher 5 Duration of Operation of
Fuel Oil Plant
variable and lower fixed costs 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Capacity Factors
Solution Capacity Factors

40

Rule:
Capacity factor of each supply is 35
measured in terms of its own 30

generation and its own capacity
25
Capacity Factor1 = Generation1 / Capacity1
20
Capacity Factor2 = Generation2 / Capacity3
Capacity Factor3 = Generation3 / Capacity3 15
10
Capacity Factor1 > Capacity Factor2 >Capacity Factor3 0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Capacity Factor of Supply and Demand

40

Capacity Factor of Each Supply 35
30
Rule: 25
Capacity factor of each plant is 20

15
measured in terms of its own 10
generation and its own capacity 5
0
Capacity Factor1 = Generation1 / Capacity1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100

30
Capacity Factor of Demand 25

20
15
Capacity Factor of Demand =
10
Total Demand / Total Capacity =
5
 Generationi = (Duration x Peak Demand) =
0
 Generationi = Area of Rectangle 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Mapping to Daily Loading Curve

Load Duration Curve Daily Loading Curve
40

40

35 Oil Plant 35

30 Energy supplied by Gas 30 OilPlant
Plant
25 Energy supplied by 25
Hydroelectric Plant Energy supplied by Gas
Plant
20 20
15 15
10 10 Energy supplied by
Hydroelectric Plant
5 5
Duration of Operation Duration of Operation of
of Fuel Oil Plant Fuel Oil Plant
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Duration (%)/100 Time (hours)
Supply and Demand
METU
Mapping to Daily Loading Curve

Solution Load Duration Curve
Three plants supplying a single demand 40
Rated Powers

Energy supplied by
Fuel Oil Plant
35
Gas Plant 20 MW Gas Plant
Transmission 40 MW
and/or 25 Energy supplied by
Fuel Oil Plant 30 MW
Distribution Hydroelectric Plant
System 20
Hydroelectric 40 MW
Plant
+ 15
90 MW
10
5
Duration of Operation
of Fuel Oil Plant
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Energy Costs
Solution Fixed and Variable Costs
Plant Fixed Variable Total Demand P(t) (MW)
Cost - Cost – 40
Power Demand met
FCC VC by Fuel Oil Plant,
Pgas = 12 MW 35
($/MWh) ($/MWh)
30
Gas Turbine (Combined Cycle) 7.36 20.78 Power Demand met
by Gas Plant,
Fuel Oil Plant 4.75 34.40 Pfuel oil = 13 MW 25
Hydroelectric 17.0 6.0 Power Demand met 20

by Hydroelectric
Plant , 15
PHydroelectric= 15 MW
10
0
Please note that 100 % duration corresponds to 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
one year period (i.e. 8765 hours) in this case Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Unit Commitment - Example

40
Annual Fixed Costs

Energy supplied by
Plant Fixed Variable Fuel Oil Plant
35
Cost - Cost –VC
FCC($/MWh) ($/MWh) Energy supplied by
30
Fuel Oil Plant 7.36 20.78 Gas Plant
Gas Turbine (Combined Cycle) 13.00 15.00 25 Energy supplied by

Hydroelectric Plant
Hydroelectric Plant 17.0 6.0
20
Annual Fixed Cost of Fuel Oil Plant = AFCF
AFCF = FCCF x Annual Capacity 15
= 7.36 $/MWh x 12 MW x 8765 h

= 774,124.80 $ / Year 10
Annual Fixed Cost of Gas Plant = AFCG 5
AFCG = FCCG x Annual Capacity 0

= 17.00 $/MWh x 13 MW x 8765 h 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
= 1,481,285.00 $ / Year Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU

40

Annual Fixed Costs Energy supplied by
Fuel Oil Plant
Plant Fixed Variable 35
Cost - Cost –VC

FCC($/MWh) ($/MWh) 30 Energy supplied by
Gas Plant
Fuel Oil Plant 7.36 20.78
Gas Turbine (Combined Cycle) 13.00 15.00 25 Energy supplied by
Hydroelectric Plant
Hydroelectric Plant 17.0 6.0
20
Annual Fixed Cost of Hydroelectric Plant = AFCH
15
AFCH = FCCH x Annual Capacity
= 7.36 $/MWh x 15 MW x 8765 h
10
= 2,235,075.00 $ / Year
Plant Cost Rated Power Duration Fixed Cost 5
($/MWh) (MW) (Hour) ($/Year)
Fixed Cost of Fuel Oil Plant 7.36 12.00 8,765.00 774,124.80
0
Fixed Cost of Gas Turbine Plant 13.00 13.00 8,765.00 1,481,285.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Fixed Cost of Hydroelectric Plant 17.00 15.00 8,765.00 2,235,075.00
Supply and Demand
METU

40
Annual Variable Costs

Energy supplied
by Fuel Oil Plant
35
Cost - Cost –VC
FCC($/MWh) ($/MWh) 30 Energy supplied
by GasPlant
Fuel Oil Plant 7.36 20.78
25
Gas Turbine (Combined Cycle) 13.00 15.00 Energy supplied
by Hydroelectric
Hydroelectric Plant 17.0 6.0 20
Plant
Annual Variable Cost of Fuel Oil Plant = AVCF

15
AVCF = VCF x Annual Generation
= 20.78 $ / MWh x 12.0 MW x 0.065 x 8765 h 10
= 142,046.33 $ / Year
Annual Variable Gas Plant = AVCG 5
AVCG = VCG x Annual Generation

= 15.00 $ / MWh x 13.0 MW x 0.606 x 8765 h 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
= 1,036,170.52 $ / Year Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU

40

Annual Variable Costs 35
Energy supplied by
Fuel Oil Plant

Cost - Cost –VC Gas Plant
FCC($/MWh) ($/MWh)
Fuel Oil Plant 7.36 20.78 Hydroelectric Plant
20
Gas Turbine (Combined Cycle) 13.00 15.00
Hydroelectric Plant 17.0 6.0 15
Annual Variable Cost of Hydroelectric Plant = AVCH 10
AVCH = VCH x Annual Generation 5
= 6.0 $ / MWh x 15 MW x 0.993 x 8765 h

= 783,591.00 $ / Year 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Plant Cost ($/MWh) Rated Power (MW) Capacity Factor Duration (Hour) Generation (MWh) Variable Cost ($/Year)
Variable Cost of Fuel Oil Plant 20.78 12.00 0.065 8,765.00 6,835.72 142,046.33
Variable Cost of Gas Turbine 15.00 13.00 0.606 8,765.00 69,078.03 1,036,170.52
Variable Cost of Hydroelectric Plant 6.00 15.00 0.993 8,765.00 130,598.50 783,591.00
Supply and Demand
METU

Annual Average Cost Itaipu HPP 12.600 MW
Annual Cost of Electricity:
ACF = AFCF + AVCF = 916,171.13 $ / year
ACG = AFCG + AVCG = 2,517,455.52 $ / year
ACH = AFCH + AVCH = 3,018,666.00 $ / year
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Cost 6,452,292.65 $ / year
Annual Generation
Generation of Fuel Oil Plant = 6,835.72 MWh / year
Generation of Gas Plant = 69,078.03 MWh / year
Generation of Hydroelectric Plant = 130,598.50 MWh / year
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Generation 206,512.26 MWh / year 15 MW 40 MW
Transmission
Average Cost of Electricity = 6,452,292.65 $ / 10 MW and/or
Distribution
206,512.26 MWh 15 MW System
+
= 3.12 Cent/kWh
40 MW
Supply and Demand
METU
Commitment of Plants in the Turkish Electrical System

Daily Loading Curve Year: 2003 Karkey 10.2 MW Stator
Total Demand P(t) (MW) 20000
18000
Export
16000
Hydroelectric
14000
12000
10000
Natural Gas 8000
Motorin (Mobile)
6000
Fuel Oil
4000
Hard Coal
Lignite 2000
Import 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time (Hours)
Supply and Demand
METU
Example from New York ISO (NYISO)

Today's Outlook (15.01.2005) Average Real-Time Prices within one-year Period
Real-Time Price ($/MWh)
2001
2002
2003
Please note that;

• Energy prices are higher in 2003 due
primarily to higher fuel costs,
• Price curve follows a pattern similar to
that of the load duration curve, i.e. Price
is lower during night periods and higher
during evening periods Hours
Supply and Demand
METU
Daily Loading Characteristics of California ISO

Today's Outlook (15.01.2005)
Available Resource Forecast
Demand (MW)
Revised Demand Forecast

Day-Ahead Demand
Actual Demand
Hours
Supply and Demand
METU
Daily Loading Characteristics of California ISO

Today's Outlook (15.01.2005)
Half-day Supply and Demand Figures (12:00 am-11:00 am)
Hour Beginning Supply and Demands (MWs)
00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00
Demand Forecast 22222 21617 20908 20761 20968 21616 24019 26918 27731 28137 28457 29035
Actual Demand 22945 21895 21340 21025 21109 21818 24271 27479 28238 28555 28710 28579
Available Gen. Capacity Forecast 32802 30585 30600 30408 30399 30359 30511 31098 30991 31640 31425 31695
Net Scheduled Interchange 4998 4806 4830 4554 4806 5214 5508 6924 6984 6948 7032 7044
Operating Reserve Req.( - ) 1444 1405 1359 1349 1362 1405 1561 1749 1802 1828 1849 1887
Available Resources Forecast 36356 33986 34071 33613 33843 34168 34458 36273 36173 36760 36608 36852
Demand Forecast 22222 21617 20908 20761 20968 21616 24019 26918 27731 28137 28457 29035
Surplus/Deficiency 14134 12369 13163 12852 12875 12552 10439 9355 8442 8623 8151 7817
Must Offer Waiver (MOW) 8083 8833 8833 8833 8833 8623 8623 7941 7941 7941 7941 7941
Abandoned offers
Supply and Demand
METU
IESO – Ontario ISO - Monthly Demand Update

Ontario Demand (MW) December 2004
Total Monthly Demand 13982
Highest Hourly Demand 24979

Lowest Hourly Demand 14169
Average Hourly Demand 18793
Average Hourly Available Capacity 24136

Average Hourly Imports 1457
Average Hourly Exports 1160
Supply and Demand
METU
IESO – Ontario ISO - Monthly Average Price Update

Ontario Average Prices (¢/kWh) December 2004
Average Hourly Weighted Price 5.28
Average Daily(*) Weighted Price 6.17
Average Night(**) Weighted Price 4.66

----------------------
(*) Between 08:00 a.m. to 08:00 p.m.
(**) Between 08:00 p.m. to 08:00 a.m.
Supply and Demand
METU
Peaker Plants
Load Duration Curve Commitment of Plants
Plants laid on the top of the curve are 40

Energy supplied by
called “Peak Plants” or simply 35
Peaker Plant
“Peaker” 30
25
20
15
10
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Peaker Plants
The Need for Peaker Plants Hasan Uğurlu HEPP (500 MW)
Peaker plants:
• Produce the most expensive electricity,
• are operated only within a certain
period of time, i.e. during the period
when the system is confronted with
the peak demand,
• are de-committed (taken out of service)
after the system has passed through
the peak loading conditions,
• do not have sufficient fuel (energy) to
supply the load for a long time
duration in a year Annual Capacity = 1.217 GWh
Capacity Factor = 1.217 / 4.382 = 27.7 %
Supply and Demand
METU
Baseload Plants
Load Duration Curve Commitment of Plants
40
“Baseload Plants” are those laid on

the bottom part of the Load Duration 35
Curve. 30
Energy supplied by
Baseload plants
Baseload plants: 25
• produce cheap electricity, 20

• are operated most of the time in a
15
year and rarely stopped,
• have sufficient energy to supply 10
the load most of the time in a year 5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Daily Loading Curves

Daily Loading Curves Daily Loading Curve
A basic characteristics of Peak level
Total Demand (MW)

electrical loads is that the Winter
demand is not constant, but a
function of time. In other words
the demand varies wrt hours, Summer
days, weeks and season
As seen from the figure, the
peak level of demand in the Off-Peak level
winter season is about 4000
MW, while the off-peak level is
2610 MW, which is 0.65 of the
peak level
Time (Hours)
Supply and Demand
METU

Daily Loading Curves Turkish System (Overall) January 2002
This situation creates serious 19.000
Monthly Average Demand (MW)

difficulties in system 18.000
operation, as electricity cannot 17.000

be stored, hence the total
16.000
supply must always be
15.000
matching the total demand and
losses in in the system 14.000
The system operator therefore, 13.000
spends a considerable amount 12.000
of care and effort to follow the 11.000
balance between the total 10.000

supply and demand 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time (Hours)
Supply and Demand
METU

Ref: Electric Power Systems, B.M. Weedy, pp. 4 Weekday Total Saturday Total
Demand (MW)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
02:00
03:00
04:00
15:00
16:00
17:00
18:00
19:00
20:00
21:00
22:00
23:00
14:00
13:00
12:00
10:00
11:00
0:00
0:00
5:00
6:00
7:00
1:00
8:00
9:00
Hours
Weekday Industrial Saturday Industrial
Supply and Demand
METU
Weekday and Weekend Daily Consumptions
Turkish Power System - Overall April 2002

20.000
Monthly Average Demand (MW)
19.000
18.000
17.000
Weekday Total
16.000
Weekend Total
15.000
14.000
13.000
12.000
11.000
10.000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time (Hours)
Supply and Demand
METU
Clipping of Peak Demand and Energy

Objective Load Duration Curve
40

“Clipping Peak Demand”
provides MW saving in 35
investment for generation plants 30

while meeting the same energy Peak energy
25 (W) clipped
“Clipping Peak Energy”
provides kWh saving in the 20
peak energy, which is relatively
more expensive by supplying 15
Peak demand
this energy from alternative (P) clipped
10
plants
5
Both help to reduce the cost of
electricity 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU

Objective Load Duration Curves (LDC)
“Clipping Peak Demand” 40

Old LDC New LDC
investment for generation plants
while meeting the same energy 30
“Clipping Peak Energy” 25

this energy from alternative 10

plants
5
electricity 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU

Objective Load Duration Curves (LDC)
“Clipping Peak Demand” 40

These areas (energies) are the same, i.e. total
energy consumption is unchanged
investment for generation plants

while meeting the same energy 30
“Clipping Peak Energy” 25

this energy from alternative 10

plants
5
electricity 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Demand Curve
Price (Cent/kWh)
7.5
Price Elasticity of Demand
Price Elasticity Curve or Demand Curve 7.0
is a curve showing the sensitivity of
electric consumption or customer 6.5
demand on price
Price Elasticity Curve shows how much 6.0
the customer agrees to pay for the first

kWh consumed, and then for the second, 5.5
and so on
Price Elasticity Curve depends on type 5.0
and nature of the load

Price Elasticity Curve may be nonlinear 4.5
1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300
Demand (kWh)
Supply and Demand
METU
Rigid Demand
Price Elasticity of Demand Please note that demand does not depend on
price, i.e. it remains unchanged
A rigid demand is the one with a certain
daily or yearly characteristics that does 7.5
Price (Cent/kWh)
not vary with price
7.0
Some loads may be more elastic, while
some others rigid. 6.5
A customer with rigid demand 6.0
characteristics will not agree to transfer

5.5
some part of its consumption in the peak
loading period to other periods 5.0
4.5
1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300

Demand (kWh)
Supply and Demand
METU
The Effect of Deregulation on Rigidity of Demand

7.5
Price (Cent/kWh)
Demand is; 7.0
• rigid in a regulated market, where

wholesale prices are not reflected to 6.5
retail prices, i.e. no price reduction is
offered to consumers for shifting their 6.0
consumptions to nights,
• elastic in a competitive market, where
5.5
retail prices are influenced by the Demand curve in a
regulated market
wholesale prices, Demand curve in a
5.0 deregulated market
In the long run, a 10 % increase in retail
prices results in 5-15 % decrease in
4.5
demand 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300
Demand (kWh)
Supply and Demand
METU
Demand Curve
Total Electricity Demand
Area under the demand curve is the total
payment that the customer agrees to pay (*) for
the total electricity purchased
-------------------------------
(*) This is the payment that the customer agrees to make for
the total electricity purchased, not the actually payment
7.5
Price (Cent/kWh)
7.0
Total payment that the customer agrees to
6.5 make for total electricity purchased
6.0
Total electricity consumed
5.5
5.0
4.5
1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300
Demand (kWh)
Supply and Demand
METU
Determination of Peak Energy Price

Peak Energy to be Clipped Price of Peak Energy
12.0
Price (Cent/kWh)
40
35
10.0
30
Peak energy to be clipped
25 W = 25000 kWh = 25 MWh
8.0
20
6.0
15
10
4.0
5
Peak energy to be clipped
= 25 MWh
2.0
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 25
Price Adjustment 50 75 100 125 150 175
Price = 2 Cent (kWh) Demand (MWh)
Duration (%)/100
EE 710 Electricity Trading, Electrical and Electronics Eng. Dept.,
1 METU, Spring 2007, Prof. Dr. Osman SEVAIOGLU, Page 90
Supply and Demand
METU
Example – 3: Demand is not Fully Met

Example 3 - Three Plant Case Daily Loading Curve
50
Consider the following case, where,

Unmet demand
supply cannot fully meet the demand at 45 (10 MW)
peak loading conditions. (i.e. supply is 40

scarce at peak loading conditions)
35
Three plants supplying a single demand
30 Energy supplied
by Fuel Oil Plant
25
Gas Plant
15 MW 50 MW
20
Fuel Oil Plant Transmission
10 MW and/or 15
Hydroelectric
Distribution System Energy supplied by
Plant Gas Plant
+ 10
15 MW
+ Energy supplied by
Hydroelectric Plant
50 MW 5
40 MW
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Please note that supply is 40 MW, while demand is 50 MW Time (hours)
Supply and Demand
METU
Example – 3: Demand is not Fully Met

Daily Loading Curve Load Duration Curve
50

50
Unmet demand
(10 MW) Unmet demand
45 45 (10 MW)
40 40
35 35
30 Energy supplied by 30
Fuel Oil Plant
25 25
20 20
Sorted
15 wrt power 15
Energy supplied by
Gas Plant
10 10
Energy supplied by
Hydroelectric Plant
5 5
0
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time (hours) Duration (hours)
Supply and Demand
METU
Example – 3: Normalized Load Duration Curve

Load Duration Curve Normalized Load Duration Curve

50
50
Unmet demand Unmet demand

Unmet demand
45 (10 MW)
45 (10 MW)
(10 MW)
40 40
35 35
30 30
25 25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (hours) Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU
Example – 3: Mapping to Screening Curves

45

Yenice HES (3 x 12.3 MW) 40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
50
45
Unmet demand (10 MW) 40
35
30
Power output of fuel oil plant
25
20
Power output of gas plant
15
Power output of hydroelectric 10
plant 5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU

Resulting Screening Curves Özlüce HES 170 MW
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
45
40
35 Hydroelectric Plant
30
25
Gas Plant
20
15
10 Fuel Oil Plant
5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU

45
Resulting Variable Costs

40
35
Derivative of the CCC with respect to 30
Capacity factor (c) yields “Total 25
Variable Cost (VC)” of the plant 20

15

5
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
= VC 8

25 7
Fuel oil Plant
6 Hydroelectric Plant
20
Variable Cost-VC 5
Gas Plant
15 4
3
10
2
5 1
Fixed Cost-FCC
0
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Capacity Factor (c)
Supply and Demand
METU
Duration (%), Capacity Factor (c)

1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Hydroelectric Plant Gas Plant Fuel Oil Plant Unmet demand (10 MW)
Supply and Demand
METU
Duration (%), Capacity Factor (c)

1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0 0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
11.0
10.0 Fuel oil Plant
9.0
Gas Plant
8.0
7.0 Hydroelectric Plant

6.0
5.0
4.0
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Supply and Demand
METU
Example – 3: Daily Price Profile

Daily Variation of Cost Muratlı HEPP (Çoruh) (2 x 57.5 MW)
13.0
12.0
11.0
10.0
Demand Curve
9.0
8.0
7.0
Fuel Oil Plant
6.0
5.0 Gas Plant
4.0
Hydroelectric
Plant
25 30 35 40 45 50
0
5 10 15 20
Supply and Demand
METU
Example – 3: Daily Price Profile

Daily Changes in Cost Daily Loading Curve

50
13.0
Please note that cost suddenly jumps
45 to 13 Cent/kWh at 40 MW demand
12.0
11.0 40
10.0 35
Demand Curve
9.0 30
8.0 25
7.0
Fuel Oil Plant 20
6.0
15
5.0 Gas Plant 10
4.0
Hydroelectric 5
Plant
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Total Demand P(t) (MW) Time (hours)
Supply and Demand
METU
Reshaping the Load Duration Curve

Three-Rate Tariff Reshaped Daily Loading Curve
Total area under the curve is the 40

Old Curve
overall consumption, hence it does 35
not vary with reshaping 30
In other words, the area reduced 25

New Curve
within the peak period is the same

as the area increased within the 20
off-peak period 15
Total area under the curve is
Evening Tariff
10
unchanged after reshaping
Night Tariff
Night Tariff
Daily Tariff
5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time (Hours)
Supply and Demand
METU
Single and Three-Rate Tariffs

40
Single and Three-Rate Tariffs (*),(**) (TL/kWh) Old Curve
35
Customer Single Evening Night Daily
Type Rate (17:00- (22:00- (06:00-
Tariff 22:00) 06:00) 17:00) 30
New Curve
Industrial(**) 119.800 202.740 58.240 113.810 25
Spring Water 123.300 206.450 61.300 117.150

20
Sewage treat. 119.800 202.740 58.240 113.810
Commercial 151.950 277.250 61.300 144.350
15
Residential 127.800 201.350 61.300 115.000
Agricultural 115.250 186.550 61.300 109.500
Evening Tariff
10
Government Inst. 119.500 186.550 61.300 109.500
Night Tariff
Daily Tariff
Night Tariff
-------------------------------------------------- 5
(*) TEDAS (64 cities +1 associated share), January 01, 2004
(**) No incentive 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time (Hours)
Supply and Demand
METU

Load Duration Curve Rule
The reshaped Load Duration Curve 40

Plant-4 (uncommitted)
will be as shown on the RHS 35
Three plants supplying
a single demand 30 Energy supplied by Plant-2
Peaker plant is
uncommitted 25
Energy supplied by Plant-1
20
0 MW
24 MW 15
9 MW Transmission
and/or 10
7.3 MW
Distribution
System 5
7.7 MW
+ 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
24 MW
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU

40

Plant-4 (uncommitted)
35
Load Duration Curve is now shaped
in two respects: 30 Energy supplied by Plant-2
• Peak portion of the curve will be 25 Energy supplied by Plant-1

clipped,
• Off-peak portion of the curve is 20
widened by an amount equal to 15

peak power, implying that peak load
is transferred into the day or night 10
periods
5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Duration (%)/100
Supply and Demand
METU

4000
Power Demand P(t) (MW)

Unshaped Load Duration Curve
3500 Shaped Load Duration Curve
For a demand with elastic price
characteristics; 3000 +
• peak of the Load Duration Curve 2500
will be lowered, thus resulting a

“flat topped” curve, 2000
• the lower portion of the curve will 1500

-
be raised
1000
Please note that the total area under the
curve (consumption) is unchanged after 500
reshaping
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time (Hours)
Supply and Demand
METU

Price Elasticity of Demand 4000

Unshaped Load Duration Curve
Shaped Load Duration Curve
This may not always be true however, 3500
as;
• Plants 1-3 may not be able to 3000 +
supply the extra power
2500
requirement to be arised from
uncommitment of Plant-4, 2000
• Demand may not be elastic 1500

-
1000
500
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time (Hours)
Supply and Demand
METU

4000

Reshaping the Load Duration Curve Unshaped Load Duration Curve
3500 Shaped Load Duration Curve

Note that the areas under the curves
remain the same since the total 3000 +
demand is unchanged
2500
The resulting operation alternative is
obviousy cheaper, since the 2000
expensive peaker plant is not
committed 1500
-
Average Price Formula 1000
İ=3
 ( Ei x VCi + FCCi x Si ) 500

İ=1
Paverage = -----------------------------------
 Ei 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time (Hours)
Fixed Cost of the i-th plant Capacity of the i-th plant Please note that peaker plant is now uncommitted

Supply and Demand

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Supply and Demand

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Supply and Demand

Itaipu: 12600 MW, Cap. Fac.: 84 %

a) electricity must be consumed

Prof. Dr. SEVAİOĞLU, Plant Chief. Eng. Kamil DİREL

Sum of generations = Sum of loads + losses

Total Supply = Total Demand + Losses

Why should Supply-Demand Balance be Maintained

In case that supply demand balance is

Sum of generations = Sum of loads + losses

Keeping Frequency Constant

Keeping Frequency Constant: Real Example

Mobil-4 20.0 25 MW Company Mobile-3/1-3

Keeping Frequency Constant: Real Example

Mobil-4 20.0 25 MW Company Mobile-3/1-3

Keeping Frequency Constant: Real Example

Keeping Frequency Constant: Real Example

(49-47) / 0.7 Hz /sec = 2.85 Hz / Sec.

Load Duration Curve

Total Demand P(t) (MW)

Annual Load Duration Curve

Load Duration Curve

Total Demand P(t) (MW)

together to yield the “Annual Load

The horizontal axis is scaled by a 20

factor of; 1 / 8765(*), in order to make 15

Load Duration Curve

Load Duration Curve

Total Demand P(t) (MW)

power level in a year 30

For instance, demand remains 25

within a period of 20 % in a year

Load Duration Curve

Total Demand P(t) (MW)

Load Duration Curve

Total Demand P(t) (MW)

0.05 x 8765 = 438.3 hours / year 30 Area-2

Duration Curve is energy, Area-1

variable costs, respectively

Capacity Factor is the same as the Percentage Duration

Total Demand P(t) (MW)

This strip is called “Demand Slice”

Capacity Factor is the same as the Percentage Duration

Total Demand P(t) (MW)

same as Capacity Factor of that 30

Total energy that can be supplied 25

by the plant is the overall hatched

Energy supplied by the plant, on 10

the other hand, is only the blue 5

Capacity Factor is the same as the Percentage Duration

Total Demand P(t) (MW)

Capacity Factor is the same as the 0

d=c Duration (%)/100

Unit Commitment – Example 1

40 MW Gas Turbine (Simplex) 4.75 34.40

Unit Commitment – Example 1

Combined Capacity Cost ($/MWh)

Hydroelectric 17.0 6.0

Unit Commitment – Example 1

Total Demand (MW)

Unit Commitment – Example 1

Total Demand (MW)

Duration Curve with a fourth order interpolating 36.0

polynomial using the WLS algorithm(*) 34.0