Future Grid PDF

ARENBERG DOCTORAL SCHOOL
Faculty of Engineering Science
Grid Planning for the Future Grid

Optimizing Topology and Technology Considering
Spatial and Temporal Effects
Hakan Ergun
Supervisor: Dissertation presented in partial

Prof. dr. ir. R. Belmans fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Doctor in Engineering
January 2015
Grid Planning for the Future Grid
Optimizing Topology and Technology Considering Spatial and Tempo-

ral Effects
Hakan ERGUN
Examination committee: Dissertation presented in partial

Prof. dr. A. Bultheel, chair fulfillment of the requirements for
Prof. dr. ir. R. Belmans, supervisor the degree of Doctor
Prof. dr. ir. W. D’haeseleer in Engineering
Prof. dr. ir. D. Van Hertem
Prof. dr. ir. N. Hadjsaid
(Technical University of Grenoble)
Prof. dr. Dipl.-Ing. H. Renner
(Graz University of Technology (TUG))
Prof. dr. Dipl.-Ing. A. Sumper
(Technical University of Catalonia (UPC))
Ir. M. Berger
(Elia Grid International)
Dr. ir. A. Oudalov January 2015
(ABB Corporate Research Switzerland)
© 2014 KU Leuven – Faculty of Engineering Science
Uitgegeven in eigen beheer, Hakan Ergun, Kasteelpark Arenberg 10, Bus 2445, B-3001 Heverlee (Belgium)
Alle rechten voorbehouden. Niets uit deze uitgave mag worden vermenigvuldigd en/of openbaar gemaakt worden
door middel van druk, fotokopie, microfilm, elektronisch of op welke andere wijze ook zonder voorafgaande
schriftelijke toestemming van de uitgever.
All rights reserved. No part of the publication may be reproduced in any form by print, photoprint, microfilm,
electronic or any other means without written permission from the publisher.
ISBN 978-94-6018-957-9
D/2015/7515/13
A smile is cheaper than electricity and brings more light - Saint Pierre
i
Abstract
Increased use of renewable energy sources and the creation of an internal

electricity market have resulted in higher and more volatile power flows
in the transmission grid. Due to a sustained climate policy, the share of
renewable energy sources in electricity generation will increase over the coming
decades. To cope with the expected future power flows, new transmission
system investments are inevitable. Over the coming decades, in Europe
alone, transmission system investments worth several hundred billion Euro are
foreseen.
The aim of transmission system planning is to provide an expansion scheme
for the transmission network in order to fulfil future grid requirements.
Transmission system planning is a complex and multidimensional problem due
to the high number of uncertainties and influencing parameters. Therefore,
it is difficult to obtain a unique optimal investment plan which satisfies all
technical, economical, social and environmental constraints. Many different
scenarios regarding generation, demand, market prices, technological and social
developments have to be analysed in the planning process in order to assess
uncertainties and minimize the investment risks.
This dissertation provides the building blocks of a transmission system
investment optimization methodology to assess different future scenarios in
a fast and effective way. The methodology consists of different modules which
can be combined to a single framework or used separately by transmission
system planners. The optimization takes the geographic and demographic
properties of the area of interest into account which are not included in existing
transmission system investment optimization methodologies. It delivers a
stepwise transmission system investment plan containing the optimal time
point, power rating, transmission route and transmission technology for new
investments. Another new feature of the developed methodology is the
determination of strong grid nodes based on probabilistic optimal power flow
solutions.
iii
Beknopte samenvatting
Toegenomen gebruik van hernieuwbare energiebronnen en de totstandkoming

van een interne markt voor elektriciteit hebben tot hogere en meer volatiele
energiestromen in het transmissienet geleid. Het volgehouden klimaatbeleid,
zal in de komende decennia het aandeel van hernieuwbare energiebronnen
in de elektriciteitsproductie verder doen toenemen. Om met de verwachte
toekomstige energiestromen te kunnen omgaan, zijn nieuwe investeringen in
het transmissienet onvermijdelijk. In de komende decennia zijn investeringen
in het transmissienet ter waarde van enkele honderden miljarden euro voorzien.
Transmissienetplanning heeft tot doel de uitbreiding van het transmissienet uit
te werken zodat het transmissienet van alle toekomstige eisen kan voldoen.
Transmissienetplanning is een complex en multidimensionaal probleem te
wijten aan het groot aantal onzekerheden en beïnvloedende parameters.
Daarom is het moeilijk om een optimaal investeringsplan te vinden dat aan
alle technische, economische, sociale en milieueisen voldoet. Een groot aantal
verschillende scenario’s met betrekking tot productie, vraag, marktprijzen,
technologische en maatschappelijke ontwikkelingen moeten in de planning
geanalyseerd worden om onzekerheden te beoordelen en het investeringsrisico
te beperken.
Dit proefschrift levert de verschillende bouwstenen van een transmissiesysteem
investeringsoptimalisatie methodologie om verschillende toekomstscenario’s op
een snelle en effectieve manier te beoordelen. De beschreven methodiek
bestaat uit verschillende modules die kunnen gecombineerd worden tot een
gloabaalaanpak of afzonderlijk gebruikt door planners. De optimalisatie
houdt rekening met de geografische en demografische eigenschappen van het
beschouwde gebied die niet zijn opgenomen in de bestaande transmissienet
investeringsoptimalisatie methodieken. Zij levert een stapsgewijze transmis-
sienet investeringsplan die het optimale tijdstip, vermogen, transmissie route
en transmissie technologie voor nieuwe investeringen bevat. Een ander
nieuw element van de ontwikkelde methodiek is het bepalen van de sterke
v
vi BEKNOPTE SAMENVATTING
knooppunten op basis van probabilistische optimale power flow berekeningen.

Acknowledgements
The following chapters are the closing words of a significant chapter of my

life. Nearly five years ago, I left Austria to come to Belgium and start my
PhD. I had beautiful years, making many new experiences and learning many
interesting and exciting things. On this five year journey, I came across many
people who guided me and walked along with me helping me to develop different
professional and personal skills and shaping me to be the person I am today. I
think, this is the right occasion to thank them.
First, I want to thank Ronnie Belmans, my promoter. Thank you for being
there in case of need and at the same time leaving me the freedom in my research
and not being too strict on deadlines or working hours. I am most thankful for
challenging me as I know that one can only grow with the challenges he has
to master. Just to give an example, since I have been in Erfurt pretty much
at the beginning of my PhD, I am not afraid of conferences any more. And of
course, I also need to thank you to keep me update about upcoming concerts
and broadening my rock music horizon.
My Leuven experience started with a skype call I had with Dirk Van Hertem
in October 2009. The whole decision making process happened quite quickly -
somewhat ironically considering the content of this thesis - and we agreed in a
couple of weeks that I should do my PhD in Leuven. Eventually, I found myself
in Leuven in February 2010 after all the paperwork was done. Dirk, although
you were having an intermezzo in Sweden, you sacrificed a lot of precious
weekend time to give direction to my research which I highly appreciate. I
thank you for all the long discussions we had, for the papers we have written
and the work we have done together in the TRIP project in the last five years. It
is a pleasure working with you. You have been the perfect guide, being critical
and supportive throughout my research. I also need to thank you for teaching
me extra curricular things such as life in Belgium, single malt scotch whiskies
and Belgian cuisine. I believe that without this supportive information, my
working efficiency would have been much lower, as let’s face the truth, Belgium
vii
viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
is quite depressing in terms of weather.

The day we visited TU Delft or when you came by in Leuven for the first IEEE
Energy Sessions, I wouldn’t have suspected that we would become colleagues
very soon. Suddenly, you were here in Leuven to work with us on the TRIP
project. Barry "the Bear" Rawn, thank you for all the long discussions we had,
eventually leading to the publications which are the basis of this thesis. Also
thank you very much for reading this thesis and providing valuable input. And
also thank you for coping with my strange kind of humour and making my
birthday parties unforgettable!
I am very glad that I could do my research in the course of the TRIP project.
I want to thank to ABB, Elia and Vattenfall for supporting my research,
providing me data and more importantly sharing their experience. I want to
thank Magnus Callavik, Johan Ahstrom, Hubert Lemmens, Christoph Druet,
Johan Söderbom, Mats Nilsson and Kristian Gustafsson to make the TRIP
project happen. I especially want to thank Alexndare Oudalov for hosting me
at the ABB Corporate Research Centre in Switzerland and Christoph Druet,
Fabian Georges, Peter Van Roy and Thierry Springuel at the grid development
department of Elia respectively. I am happy that I could learn many interesting
things in a friendly working climate and with excellent coffee!
Well, people who me know that I love the city of Leuven and think that is is
a great place to live. In my opinion, a city is a reflection of the people who
populate it. In the past five years, I have met wonderful people here most
of them being my colleagues. You made me feel home every time, inside and
outside the of Electa office. That’s why I enjoyed coming to office everyday,
knowing that my day will at least be fun if it not productive. It is difficult to
find such a large research group where the interaction is inside and outside of
the office is so close and personal.
First of all, thank you guys of the Power Group! Especially, Jef, David,
Stijn, Simon, Patrik, Kristof, Pieter, Steven, Cedric, Willem and Robert for
being more than just a colleague. Thank you for introducing me in the art of
barbecuing, teaching me the Dutch language, making me aware of Esperanto
music, keeping me up to date with the latest concert agenda, broadening my
beer horizon and travelling to the end of the world together. I am sure that we
will keep the power spirit alive among the new colleagues as well.
Electa is of course more than just the Power Group. Thank you all for
coping with my strange kind of humour, the politically incorrect and definitely
inappropriate talks we had for lunch and all the fun things we did together.
Frederik, Niels, Jeroen, Juan and Carlos thank you for your friendship and
support. I had a great time in everything we did.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ix
I also want to thank the guys of the IEEE Student Branch Leuven for their
help and dedication in everything we did. It was a great experience to organize
many lectures, symposia, trips, soireé techniques and of course, beer tastings
together.
I want to thank the technical staff for not getting mad when I set things on
fire in the lab from time to time. I also want to thank the administrative staff,
especially Katleen, for managing the excessive amount of paper work, being
patient with me and setting up all the "Tolintos".
Jan, although we did a lot of insane things together, you are the person who
kept me sane during my PhD. I can not thank you enough for always being
there, cheering me up in times of sadness, celebrating with me the good times,
listening constantly to my complaints and problems and giving me the right
advice to solve them. You are the definition of a true friend and it is a privilege
being friends with you!
Moving to a new country to and starting a new life can be a scary experience.
But somehow, in my family we seem to have it in our genes to be scattered
in different parts of the world. Although we are many kilometres apart, I can
always count on the support of my family in times of need. Thank you for
everything you do for me. In future, I promise to do my best to remember
birthdays, as apparently, I can not use the thesis-stress as an excuse any more.
Hakan Ergun
Leuven, January, 2015
List of Abbreviations
AC Alternating Current
BFC Brute Force Calculation
CB Critical Branch
CPTE Coordination de la Production et du Transport de lÉnergie électrique
DC Direct Current
DP Dynamic Programming
ECF European Climate Foundation
ETSO European Transmission System Operators
ENTSO-E European network of transmission system operators for electricity
ERP European Recovery Program
FACTS Flexible Alternating Current Transmission Systems
GCCM Gaussian Component Combination Method
HVAC High Voltage Alternating Current
HVDC High Voltage Direct Current
LLF Line Limit Frequency
LODF Line Overload Distribution Factor
LP Linear Programming
MCS Monte Carlo Simulation
MILP Mixed Integer Linear Programming
MINLP Mixed Integer Non-Linear Programming
MIP Mixed Integer Programming
MPIC Maximum Power Injection Capability
NLP Non-linear Programming
OHL Overhead Line
OPF Optimal Power Flow
OWF Offshore Wind Farm
PDF Probability Distribution Function
PSDF Phase Shifter Distribution Function
xi
xii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
PST Phase Shifting Transformer

PTDF Power Transfer Distribution Factor
RES Renewable Energy Sources
SEDAC Socio-economic Data and Applications Centre
SSSC Static Synchronous Series Compensator
TCSC Thyristor Controlled Series Compensation
TSO Transmission System Operator
UCPTE Union for the Co-ordination of Production and Transmission of Electricity
UCTE Union for the Co-ordination of and Transmission of Electricity
UGC Underground Cable
VSC Voltage Source Converter
WWII World War II
Contents
Abstract iii
Beknopte samenvatting v
Acknowledgements vii
List of Abbreviations xi
Contents xiii
List of Figures xix
List of Tables xxiii
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Historic Development of the European Transmission Grid . . . 1
1.2 European Grid Today and Future Perspectives . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.4 Objectives, context and contribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2 Transmission Grid Planning 15

2.1 Context of Transmission System Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
xiii
xiv CONTENTS
2.2 Functionality of grids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2.3 The four W’s of the Transmission Expansion Problem . . . . . 18
2.3.1 Where to Invest? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.3.2 What type of investment? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.3.3 When to Invest? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.3.4 Who pays for the investment? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.3.5 Other Influencing Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
2.3.6 Transmission Grid Planning in the Liberalized Context 27
2.4 Transmission Expansion Optimization Methodologies . . . . . . 28
2.4.1 Classification by Solution Method . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.4.2 Classification by Planning Horizon . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2.4.3 Classification by Market Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.4.4 Deterministic vs. Non-Deterministic Expansion Problems 32
2.5 Transmission system planning in practise . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.6 Structure of the Proposed Transmission Expansion Optimization
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.6.1 Interconnetion level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.6.2 Network Abstraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.6.3 Substation level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3 Maximum Power Injection Capabilities 41

3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.2 Calculation of maximum power injection capabilities . . . . . . 43
3.3 Optimal power flow formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.4 Probabilistic methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
3.4.1 Gaussian distributed variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
3.4.2 Gaussian Component Combination Method . . . . . . . 52
3.4.3 Monte Carlo Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
CONTENTS xv
3.4.4 Comparison of Monte Carlo Simulation and GCCM . . 56

3.5 Effect of N-1 security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
3.6 Effect of power flow controlling devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
3.6.1 PST devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
3.6.2 HVDC connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
3.7 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
4 Optimization of Topology, Technology and Routing 67

4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
4.2 Structure of the optimization methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
4.3 MILP optimization of Topology and Rating . . . . . . . . . . . 70
4.4 Calculation and update of average costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
4.5 Optimal Routing Formulation and Solution From Cost Graph . 75
4.5.1 Dijkstra’s shortest path algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
4.5.2 A* shortest path algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
4.6 Case study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
4.7 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5 Optimization of Investment Time Points 91

5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.2 Problem formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
5.3 Application of the time point optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
5.3.1 Variation of meshed HVDC constraint . . . . . . . . . . 98
5.3.2 Variation of line delay constraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
5.3.3 Variation of maximum investment constraint . . . . . . 104
5.4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
xvi CONTENTS
6 Application of the transmission investment optimization method-

ology 107
6.1 Description of case study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
6.2 Identification of strong nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
6.3 Possible future expansion plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
6.4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
7 Conclusions and future work 121

7.1 Overview and overall conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
7.2 Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
A Network data of modified IEEE 24 Bus Test system for MPIC

calculation 127
B Spatial weights for installation costs of equipment 133
C Developed Software 135

C.1 Pesudo-code: Calculation of maximum power injection capabilities135
C.2 Pesudo-code: Investment optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
C.2.1 Pseudo code: Optimal routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
C.3 Tool to optimize offshore wind farm connections . . . . . . . . 137
C.3.1 General methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
C.3.2 Rule based heuristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
C.3.3 Optimization of voltage level, technology selection and
cable cross sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
C.3.4 Input and output interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
Bibliography 145
List of publications 157

CONTENTS xvii
Curriculum Vitae 159

List of Figures
1.1 Pan-European transmission grid proposed in 1930 . . . . . . . . 3

1.2 European supergrid vision after the second world war . . . . . 4
1.3 The European transmission grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4 Share of generation from renewable energy sources . . . . . . . 6
1.5 Share of installed RES capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.6 Investment needs on European scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1 Investment needs on regional and substation level . . . . . . . . 19

2.2 Predicted versus actual wind power in feed . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.3 Hourly wind for cast error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.4 Transmission system costs per MW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.5 Layers of the transmission investment problem . . . . . . . . . 29
2.6 Transmission system planning in practise . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.7 Structure of the proposed long term transmission expansion
optimization methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.8 Main input and output parameters of the interconnection level 37
2.9 Principle of network abstraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.10 Main input and output parameters of the network abstraction . 39
2.11 Main input and output parameters of the substation level . . . 40
xix
xx LIST OF FIGURES
3.1 Principle of network abstraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

3.2 Structure of methodology to calculate maximum power injection
capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.3 Weighting different objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.4 Modified IEEE 118 bus system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
3.5 Relative difference between AC and DC OPF methods . . . . . . 51
3.6 Probability distribution of the power output of a wind farm . . 54
3.7 Typical power output curve of a wind turbine . . . . . . . . . . 55
3.8 General principle of Monte Carlo simulation . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3.9 Comparison of GCCM and MC simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
3.10 Line selection procedure for N-1 criterion . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
3.11 Comparison of M P IC between N and N-1 case on the modified
IEEE 118bus network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
3.12 Modelling of PSTs with additional equivalent power injections . 62
3.13 Effect of existing PSTs on the M P IC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.14 Modeling of HVDC connections in the optimal power flow
calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
3.15 Effect of existing HVDC lines on the maximum power injection
capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
4.1 Iterative optimization of transmission topology, technology,

cabling and routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
4.2 Average transmission system costs in e/ MW as a function of
rated power in MW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
4.3 Calculation of initial and updated average costs for the MILP
optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
4.4 Creation of a weighted directed graph by discretizing a spatial
map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
4.5 Creation of a weighted directed graph containing four technolo-
gies as input for the shortest path algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . 78
4.6 Comparison of Dijkstra and A* shortest path algorithms . . . . 83
LIST OF FIGURES xxi
4.7 Spatial map of area of focus showing candidate nodes . . . . . 84

4.8 Effect of spatial resolution on edge weights . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
4.9 Comparison of different resolutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
4.10 Optimal topology calculated with a resolution of 4 km including
N-1 for P inter = 8000 M W , K = 2000 M W . . . . . . . . . . . 90
5.1 The process of transmission system investments . . . . . . . . . 92

5.2 Optimal investment plan of base case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
5.3 Optimal investment plan if multi-terminal HVDC may first be
built in time point 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
5.4 Optimal investment plan if multi-terminal HVDC is not allowed 101
5.5 Optimal investment plan if connections between 12-14 and 12-23
are allowed in the second time step of the planning horizon . . 102
5.6 Optimal investment plan if connections between 12-14 and 12-23
after the third step of planning horizon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
6.1 Required additional transmission capacity for 2050 . . . . . . . 108

6.2 Population density and elevation map of the Iberian peninsula
and France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
6.3 Simplified European high voltage transmission grid representation110
6.4 Simplified high voltage transmission grid representation of
France and Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
6.5 Maximum power import and export capabilities of candidate nodes113
6.6 Optimal investment plan for K = 3 GW . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
6.7 Optimal investment plan for K = 5 GW . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
6.8 Optimal investment plan for K = 8 GW and multi-terminal
HVDC delayed for 20 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
6.9 Optimal investment plan for K = 5 GW in case of line delays . 119
A.1 The IEEE 24 bus test system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

xxii LIST OF FIGURES
C.1 General methodology of the offshore transmission optimization

tool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
C.2 Rule based heuristics to create new transmission topologies . . 140
C.3 Optimization routine for voltage, technology and cable cross
sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
C.4 technology decision function for offshore transmission paths . . 142
C.5 Input interfaces of developed tool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
C.6 Input interfaces of developed tool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
List of Tables
4.1 Spatial weights of the sub areas for the different technology options 84
4.2 Comparison of proposed method (PRO) and brute force calcula-
tion (BFC), excluding N-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
5.1 Cost, length and time points of built links in the base case . . . 98
5.2 Cost, length and time points of built links, with constraint on
multi-terminal HVDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
5.3 Cost, length and time points of built links if multi-terminal
HVDC is not allowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
5.4 Total costs of investments with constraint on capital availability 105
6.1 Comparison of different maximum power ratings per path . . . 117
A.1 Bus data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

A.2 Generator Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
A.3 Generator Cost Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
A.4 Branch Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
B.1 Spacial weights for elevation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

B.2 Spacial weights for population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
xxiii
Chapter 1
Introduction
To get the economy of the electric power, coordination of all the industries
is necessary, and the electric power is probably today the most powerful force
tending towards coordination, that is cooperation. - Charles P. Steinmetz
1.1 Historic Development of the European Trans-

mission Grid
During the first World War, there has been a large increase in demand
for electricity, especially, in the United States of America and in Germany.
New factories were built to produce steel and nitrate, the basic component
for fertilizers and explosives [1]. To meet the large demand required by
such factories, new power plants with higher power ratings than at that
time available were needed. In the United States hydro power plants were
constructed, whereas in Germany mostly lignite was used. As these power
plants were situated near the location of the primary energy, i.e. near rivers,
resp. lignite mines, they were not always close to the location of the demand.
Therefore, longer transmission distances needed to be bridged to connect load
centres and power plants. High voltage transmission lines were used to increase
the transmitted power while keeping the voltage drops and the transmission
losses sufficiently low over these larger distances.
After World War I, there was an overcapacity in generation as demand crumbled
and power plants could only be operated at reduced output. There was an urge
to operate the electricity system in a more economic way. Therefore, first high
1
2 INTRODUCTION
voltage interconnections were built to link thermal and hydro generation units
with each other. This way, demand could be met to larger extends by cheaper
hydro power plants in seasons where rivers carried sufficient water. During
low water seasons or frost, the majority of the electricity could be supplied by
thermal units [2].
Another reason for interconnecting different areas was to flatten load profiles.
The interconnected areas had their highest and lowest load levels in different
hours of the day. By interconnecting these systems thus aggregating the load,
flatter profiles could be achieved. The flat load profiles decreased generation
costs as the power plants could run at their optimal operating points. In the
early 1920s, first connections between Swiss hydro power plants in Gösgen and
French thermal power plants in Nancy were established for this purpose [2].
Other interconnections were built to connect the lignite power plants in the
Ruhr area in Germany with the hydro power plants in Switzerland and Austria.
In 1930, RWE built the hydro storage power plant Vermuntwerk in Austria
which was also connected to the thermal power plants in the Ruhr area. For
this purpose the substation in Brauweiler has been put in operation 1929 [2].
This substation was the starting point of the Verbundbetrieb, which literally can
be translated to connected operation. In Brauweiler, power plants and loads
could be controlled and monitored enabling a more economic operation using
complementary technologies.
Although Europe was politically diverging between the years 1930 and 1937,
the idea of having an economically unified Europe was put forward by some
politicians and scientists. The economic unification would create an internal
market such as in the United States of America and help European countries
to get out of the economic depression. The economic unification should also
bring more peace in the region. As the electrical power supply was one of
the major elements of economic growth, the electrical unification of Europe
was proposed. Some politicians believed that if Europe was electrically and
economically united, a peaceful and prosperous environment could be achieved.
In early 1930s several ideas of a Pan-European electricity transmission grid were
proposed. The proposed systems used transmission voltages of 220 kV, 400 kV
or 660 kV. The most famous proposal was made by Oskar Oliven at the second
World Power Conference in Berlin in 1930 (figure 1.1). He proposed a Pan-
European 400 kV transmission grid operated at 220 kV until standardization
was achieved [2]. The proposed transmission network had two main connection
axis. The east-west axis would connect the Iberian peninsula with Turkey and
the Ukraine and the north-south axis would connect Scandinavia with northern
Italy and Yugoslavia.
The same year, the Belgian government came with a proposal of pursuing the
idea of Oliven to establish the European electricity network. In the following
HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE EUROPEAN TRANSMISSION GRID 3
Figure 1.1: Pan-European transmission grid as proposed by Oskar Oliven at

the second World Power Conference in 1930 [3]
years the matter was discussed at European level by decision makers, scientists
and engineers. Eventually, this idea of a European network was abandoned as
the majority of the discussing parties believed that national electricity grids
with interconnecting lines to neighbouring countries would be more feasible
than a European grid. One of the reasons was that the 400 kV technology
was not yet sufficiently developed in the 1930s. Another aspect was that the
proposed European grid did not take the underlying transmission grids and the
ongoing processes of national network planning sufficiently into account [2].
In the pre WWII years and during the war, most countries developed national
networks by connecting internal zones. This also required the installation of
central dispatch units to coordinate operation as the latter became more and
more complex. Two examples illustrating this are the creation of the Belgian
Coordination de la Production et du Transport de l’Énergie électrique - CPTE
established in 1937 and the German Zentrallastverteiler established in 1939.
4 INTRODUCTION
These dispatch centres could control and monitor power plants and substations
countrywide. During WWII, Germany established a number of connections to
their neighbouring countries which they occupied or were allied with. One of
the interesting ones is the 220 kV connection between Lutterade (Netherlands),
Brauweiler (Germany) and Jupille (Belgium) established in 1944 but taken out
of service after some months due to the developments in the war [2].
After WWII the European power system was separated mainly for political
reasons. There were three separated transmission grids linked to the European
Recovery Program (ERP) also known as the Marshall plan. Central and
Western European countries who participated in the program, started to rebuild
their demolished infrastructure and also established interconnections to other
participants of the program wherever needed. Scandinavian and Eastern
European countries who did not participate in the program started to build
interconnections with neighbours in their own region. At the end of 1940s,
ideas were put forward again to establish a European "super" grid as of the
Marshall plan zone. By using 400 kV interconnections, the idea was to better
coordinate the operation of thermal and hydro power plants and thus achieve
higher economic benefits (figure 1.2).
Figure 1.2: Vision of the European supergrid after the second world war
But as in the 1930s, the outcome was that countries should establish their
own national networks first and build interconnections to their neighbouring
countries only to support each other in case of need. The establishment of
EUROPEAN GRID TODAY AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES 5
interconnections and the operation of tie lines were coordinated bilaterally.

Therefore, most countries continued to build 150 and 220 kV connections on a
national level as well as links with their direct neighbours.
In the decades following 1950, the European transmission grid grew gradually
in a "natural" way. Generally speaking, the transmission system expanded
together with the generation capacity needed to satisfy the increasing demand
due to the rapidly growing economy. Although the idea of having one European
transmission system was abandoned, there was a strong collaboration between
different countries in planning and operation. In 1951, the first European
power pool, the UCPTE, was established which aimed to coordinate planning
and operation. Doing so, unnecessary reserves could be avoided and the
economic performance of the electricity system improved. The cooperation
in the electricity sector resulted in better connectivity between countries. As
a matter of fact, in 1958, the entire UCPTE network was interconnected
and operated synchronously at 50 Hz. The European transmission system
continued to grow on national and international level using 400 kV transmission
lines. In the following years, HVDC connections to non-synchronized regions
such as Great Britain and Scandinavia were established. The natural growth
of the system resulted in the transmission grid of today (figure 1.3). The
cooperation in the electricity sector was further strengthened. In 1999, UCPTE
was redefined as UCTE as an association of transmission system operators in
the context of the liberalization of the internal energy market where generation,
transmission and supply of electricity were unbundled. In 2009, the tasks of
UCTE were merged with these of European Transmission System Operators
(ETSO) to become the European network of transmission system operators for
electricity (ENTSO-E).
1.2 European Grid Today and Future Perspectives
Today, once more the European electricity sector is facing changes and
challenges. Driven by the European 20-20-20 targets, the share of generation
from renewable energy sources (RES) in the total generation keeps increasing
very fast. This has a major impact on the generation mix and the way
the transmission grid is operated. Compared to 1990, the share of gross
generation from renewable energy sources has increased from 0.5% to 8, 8%
of total generation in 2010 (figure 1.4). By the end of this decade, the share
of renewable energy generation from wind and solar resources is expected to
be 18.7% of the total electricity production [5]. If the generation from hydro
power plants is included in the calculation, the total share of generation from
renewable energy sources is expected to be 34.7% of the total gross electricity
6 INTRODUCTION
Figure 1.3: The Entso-e transmission grid [4]
production in 2020 [5]. This trend is expected to continue in the decades beyond
2020 in order to further decrease greenhouse gas emissions and dependency on
foreign primary energy resources. The fact that especially solar and wind
power generation technologies have reached a sufficient level of maturity, larger
and more efficient systems are built which further help to decrease the cost of
renewable energy.
45
. .RES excl. hydro power
. .RES incl. hydro power
40
35
30
Share of RES in %
25
20
15
10
0. . 1980 1990 2000 2008 2009 2010 2020 2030
Figure 1.4: Share of generation from renewable energy sources between 1980
and 2030 [5]
EUROPEAN GRID TODAY AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES 7
While designing the transmission network, the expected power flows are used
as basis of the design process. Obviously, the transmission network has to be
designed in such a way that it can cope with them in a sufficiently reliable
and economic manner. As power flows are the result of all injections and
withdrawals, the expected installed capacity becomes more important in system
planning than the energy transported over a certain period.
Looking at the installed capacity of generation units from renewable energy
sources, a very similar increasing trend compared to the harvested energy is
noticed (figure 1.5). By the end of this decade, the total installed capacity of
wind power plants is expected to reach 18.9% of the total installed generation
capacity in Europe [6]. Including solar generation, hydro generation and other
renewable sources, the total expected share of installed generation capacity
from renewable energy sources will reach 54.4% by 2030 [6]. In 2013, 72.5% of
newly installed generation capacity used renewable energy sources [7].
60
. .hydro power
. .wind power
. .solar power
50
40
Share of RES in %
30
20
10
0. . 1980 1990 2000 2008 2009 2010 2020 2030
Figure 1.5: Share of installed RES capacity between 1980 and 2030 [6]
The intermittent nature of solar and wind power increases the volatility of flows
in the European transmission grid significantly. Volatility is also affected by
the liberalization of the European electricity market. The efforts to create a
single European electricity market create higher competition on international
level. This results in higher flows between countries or regions within a country.
Over the last two decades, approximately 80 phase shifting transformers have
been installed in the European transmission grid, showing the challenges of
controlling such high volatility of power flows.
Ideally, solar and wind power farms should be built where the resources are
available in contrary to distributed renewable energy sources. In reality, one
of the important decision criteria for the selection of the location is the visual
impact. The most favourable locations in terms of wind speed are the Atlantic
8 INTRODUCTION
Coast, Baltic and North Sea region. For large scale solar power plants, the
highest energy yield can probably be achieved around the Mediterranean Sea in
southern Europe and Northern Africa (figure 1.6). Most of the new generation
facilities using solar and wind power are expected to be installed in these
regions. ENTSO-E affirms that there will be more volatile power flows over
larger distances in the coming decade, due to the advancing European market
coupling within and the relocation of generation facilities further from load
centres [8]. The volatility of power flows in the European transmission network
will increase both in duration and distance.
Figure 1.6: Schematic illustration of transmission grid investment needs on

European scale
As stated in the 2012 ten year network development plan, ENTSO-E estimates
that 52300 km of new or refurbished extra high voltage routes will be required
in the coming decade [8]. In monetary terms, the investment need is estimated
at 104 Ge, equally spread over the coming decade [8]. A significant portion
of these new investments will be used for submarine cables as there is a move
towards installing large offshore wind farms and increasing the interconnection
capacity between non-synchronous zones. Currently, the total amount of
installed offshore wind power in Europe is approximately 7 GW. In 2013 alone,
1.3 GW of offshore wind power was installed [7]. If this trend continues, a total
of approximately 23.5 GW offshore wind power will be installed by the end of
this decade [9].
MOTIVATION 9
HVDC submarine connections are primarily used to connect non-synchronous

areas but recently they are becoming embedded in systems within synchronous
networks. In the future, more (HVDC) interconnections will be needed in order
to satisfy the additional need for transmission capacity and further increase the
competition and security of supply in Europe. ENTSO-E estimates that in the
coming decade 23 Ge will be invested in submarine transmission infrastructure
alone [8].
1.3 Motivation
For over more than 80 years, the idea of a European supergrid has been put
forward in times of significant changes in the power sector, changes being of
political or economical nature. Currently, the idea of a supergrid is put forward
again, mainly due to climate policy driven renewable boom and the electricity
market structure.
In the past, the maturity of technology has been one of the barriers for the
implementation of a European supergrid. Obviously, there has been significant
technological progress over the last 80 years and many technical obstacles
for a supergrid have been removed. Especially, due to the developments in
high voltage direct current and underground transmission technologies, the
transmission of several GW of power over hundreds of kilometres has become
feasible. However, the maturity of transmission technologies does not imply
that such a European supergrid is feasible in all its aspects. The feasibility of
such major infrastructure has to be analysed in depth in all technical, social,
environmental and economic aspects.
There exist a number of studies investigating a European supergrid from
different perspectives [10–16]. They provide rough maps showing different
architectures of what such a European supergrid could look like. Nevertheless,
there is no study or methodology analysing the European supergrid in all its
dimensions [17]. In order to optimally use financial and natural resources,
research and development of new transmission system planning techniques are
required.
The planning and implementation of the European power system combining
renewable energy sources and the transmission infrastructure to connect them,
requires major engineering and computing effort. Such a European supergrid
would be implemented step by step. The time horizon to realise a supergrid
can reach several decades. Such long time horizons make infrastructure projects
subject to a large number of uncertainties. Therefore, it is important to analyse
a versatile number of scenario’s in order minimize the risks.
10 INTRODUCTION
As elaborated in the previous section, several 100 Ge should be invested in

the European transmission grid over the coming decades following ENTSO-E.
Using optimization techniques in the planning process, large savings can be
achieved which increase the total social welfare making the transition towards
more renewable energy more affordable. In case several future scenario’s exist,
optimal transmission grid architectures for each scenario can be determined.
By comparing the optimal grid structure for each scenario, a structure can be
derived which suits most scenarios and therefore minimizes investment risks.
1.4 Objectives, context and contribution
Objectives
The aim of this thesis is to provide the building blocks of a methodology

to determine optimal grid architectures. If optimal grid architectures can
be obtained in a fast and efficient way, a large number of scenarios can be
compared. In this way, transmission system operators or independent system
planners can analyse different future scenarios regarding generation, demand,
available technology, construction delays and equipment prices under different
assumptions in order to minimize the risk for future investments. The aim of
this thesis is not to make a statement if a European supergrid as proposed in
various sources is possible or not. It wants to provide a methodology to make
such an assessment possible.
Context
This thesis is developed in the course of the industrial research project

TRIP, Transmission Remuneration and Investment Planning with the
project partners ABB, Vattenfall and Elia, the Belgian transmission system
operator. The aim of the TRIP project is to investigate and develop new
methodologies for long term transmission system planning and regulatory
framework design. This thesis focuses only on the first part and aims to develop
a new methodology for long term transmission system planning introducing
optimization techniques in the process. The regulatory aspects are addressed
in the thesis of my fellow colleague Muhajir Mekonnen.
The thesis work has partly been performed at the Corporate Research
Centre of ABB in Switzerland, where a new methodology is developed
optimizing topology, power rating, technology selection, transmission routing
and investment time point of new transmission system investments.
OBJECTIVES, CONTEXT AND CONTRIBUTION 11
At the grid planning department of Elia, the optimization methodology is

further refined and applied to the Belgian transmission grid for verification.
The methodology has been used to assess possibilities of transmission grid
expansion to enable the integration of offshore wind power in 2030. In the
analysis, the optimization methodology is applied to different voltage levels of
HVAC and HVDC equipment in order to determine the optimal voltage level of
future investments. The methodology has delivered satisfactory results which
cannot be published in this thesis due to confidentiality reasons.
The methodology and accompanying software tools are developed in such a way
that they can be used by transmission grid planners as an addition to existing
planning tools or combined to a single planning tool. They have been developed
in a modular way allowing user interaction and interference. This allows the
grid planner to include his experience in the optimization process and to analyse
a set of scenarios to identify and investigate the most important parameters.
The developed methodology and tools aim to provide a set of solutions which
can be further analysed by grid planners rather than one optimal solution.
Contributions
The main contribution of this thesis is the study and design of different building
blocks of a transmission system investment optimization methodology. Three
major building blocks and accompanying software tools are developed.
• Methodology/tool to calculate the maximum power injection capability of

the existing network. The methodology combines several techniques in a
novel way to quantify how much power can be injected in the transmission
grid, taking probabilistic distribution of generation and load, N-1 security
and existing power flow controlling devices into account.
• Methodology/tool to determine optimal transmission routes. For a given
connection and power rating of a transmission link , its optimal route
and technology is determined minimizing investment costs. Taking into
account spatial properties and according installation costs, the best
technology and cabling option along the transmission route is determined.
High voltage alternating current (HVAC) and high voltage direct current
(HVDC) are considered as possible technology options whereas overhead
lines, underground and submarine cables are considered as possible
cabling options.
• Methodology/tool to optimize transmission topology, rating and time

point for long term transmission system investments. The tool delivers an
12 INTRODUCTION
optimal investment sequence minimizing investment costs of new assets

over a given planning time horizon. The optimization methodology
interacts iteratively with the previous building block in order to account
for spatial properties during the optimization process. The methodology
includes constraints which can be manipulated by the grid planner in
order to investigate possible delays in the investment process.
Combined into a single planning approach, the three building blocks deliver
a stepwise investment plan including the optimal transmission route and
technology for each new transmission transmission system investments.
Structure of the thesis
The thesis is organized as follows.

Chapter 2 describes transmission system planning in general. Difficulties and
uncertainties in the planning process are discussed. The chapter provides
the literature study to assess the state of the art of transmission system
planning methodologies and discusses their shortcomings. It concludes with the
outline of the developed methodology and describes briefly the afore mentioned
building blocks.
Chapter 3 describes the first building block of the proposed methodology. It
shows how the existing transmission grid can be reduced to a set of possible
injections. In order to take the probabilistic nature of generation and demand
into account, the reduction is performed using probabilistic optimal power flow
techniques. In this chapter, a number of known techniques are combined in a
different way to make such a reduction possible. The set of injections serves as
input for the investment optimization methodology described in the following
chapters.
Chapter 4 provides an optimization methodology to determine the economically
most feasible transmission system layout including the determination of
transmission routes and technology selection. The chapter shows how the
efficiency of the optimization is increased using an iterative combination of
mixed integer linear programming and optimal routing algorithms.
Chapter 5 further extends the developed investment optimization methodology
by including time point optimization. The extension is achieved by modifying
the problem statement of the linear integer program including new constraints.
The output of the extended investment optimization is a stepwise investment
plan for new transmission system investments.
OBJECTIVES, CONTEXT AND CONTRIBUTION 13
Chapter 6 shows a case study to demonstrate the practical application of the

proposed methodology. Based on it, the effect of variations in input data on
the final investment plan and the total costs are discussed.
Chapter 7 provides conclusions and gives recommendations for future research
on transmission system investment optimization.
Chapter 2
Transmission Grid Planning
I love it when a plan comes together! - Col. John Hannibal Smith
2.1 Context of Transmission System Planning
There is a continuous demand for electricity which has to be met at all times.
Generation and demand vary in two dimensions, time and space. Transmission
grids are developed to connect large generation facilities with large consumers
or distribution grids over larger distances to ensure cost-effective electricity
supply. Transmission grids are the backbone of the electricity system.
The aim of transmission grid planning is to provide a schedule for grid
extensions such that it is able to reliably connect generation and demand
facilities considering the variation in time and space. The transmission system
planning is usually carried out on short (< 5 years), medium (< 10 years)
and long term (> 10 years) [18]. The level of detail decreases in time as less
information is available and uncertainties become higher. The planning horizon
for new connections can reach several decades as the volumes of investments
are large and the lifetime of assets built is long.
Besides the technical aspects of the electric power system, also economic aspects
have to be taken into account during planning. Therefore, different cost-benefit
analysis methods have to be conducted by grid planners in order to assess the
total social welfare during planning. Hence, the ultimate goal of transmission
grid planners is to find the best possible long term grid expansion scheme in
the frame of given investment policies.
15
16 TRANSMISSION GRID PLANNING
The electric power system consists of generation, demand and transmission.

One could suggest that the three systems should be planned and optimized
as a whole in order to achieve a global optimum while using a minimum
of financial and technical resources. In practice, the three systems are
planned separately by considering different interactions. Even before market
liberalization, planning has been carried out separately as the main drivers for
the three systems are different. Generation facilities are most feasible where
access to natural resources is easy. Therefore, generation facilities are mostly
built directly at the source of the resource such as rivers, lignite mines and
LNG terminals or near logistic infrastructure such as harbours, railway hubs
or gas grid hubs. Wind and solar power plants are built at locations with high
wind speeds and solar radiation. For the electricity demand, different social
and economic drivers are decisive yet demand is not definitely planned although
policy might influence long term load growth. Especially after liberalization,
the level of complexity in these interactions has increased as all three systems
are operated by different entities having different goals, policies and agendas.
The long term development of power generation and transmission system is
directly linked to energy policy. As such, the long term policy on the use of
different primary energy sources has to be optimized as a whole considering
security of supply, environmental impact and internal and external costs and
according to transmission assets.
Transmission investments can be characterized as [19]:
• A natural monopoly, with only one responsible company for the

construction of grids within a given area;
• A capital intensive business, using expensive equipment, occupying

considerable space. The investment costs are normally substantially more
important than the operational ones;
• Transmission assets have a long life, with expected life ranging from 20
to 40 years, or even longer for transmission lines;
• Most transmission investments are irreversible: it is virtually impossible
to move most transmission assets from their original site. Investment
decisions made now remain in the system and might become stranded if
the rest of the energy system does not develop as anticipated;
• Transmission investments are lumpy, meaning that equipment is normally
offered in a limited set of distinct ratings of voltage and power;
• Transmission networks are strongly subject to economies of scale: it is
comparatively cheap to build infrastructure with high power capacity.
FUNCTIONALITY OF GRIDS 17
Overall, transmission system planning is very challenging and complex in

nature. Especially for long term planning, with a planning horizon of one or
several decades, there are considerable uncertainties in load and generation
which need to be accounted for while designing the transmission system.
This chapter aims to provide insights in the complex transmission expansion
planning problem by pointing out the different aspects and by showing the
difficulties. The motivation of transmission system expansion planning is
provided. Existing planning methodologies are explained. The chapter is
concluded with the brief description of the transmission planning methodology,
elaborated throughout this thesis.
2.2 Functionality of grids
Beside connecting generation and demand, electricity grids provide more

functions to be considered by the system planner for the future grid.
Theoretically, each consumer has the freedom of installing his own generator
to cover demand. In such a case there is no need for the transmission of
electricity. In fact, the electrification started from isolated load centres. As
generation facilities are not always available due to maintenance or unforeseen
outages, reserve generation facilities were needed to satisfy the demand in such
cases. This resulted in investments which were only needed for a short period
of time. Eventually, the isolated load centres were interconnected in order to
reduce the need for reserves, resulting in more efficient generation investment
and a higher reliability of supply. This is known as the interconnection function
of the grid. Another advantage of the interconnection function is that there
is a common supply of grid users resulting in reduced demand peaks as the
demand is aggregated [20].
Obviously, the grid fulfils the transmission function. This way, energy can be
transported from distant sources to the load centers. In general, large hydro
or wind power plants are situated far away. Transmission grids allow the use
of such resources by connecting distant generation facilities [20].
The grid has also a market facilitator function. It acts as the market place
where different parties, such as generators, suppliers and consumers can make
transactions. Higher interconnection capacity reduces congestion and increases
social welfare. Obviously, not every commercial transaction results in a physical
flow. But limited interconnection capacity constrained by the physical flow,
also puts a constraint on the market transactions [20].
The system developer has the responsibility of acting in this global context
considering the different tasks of the grid. Eventually, the overall goal is to
ensure a reliable energy supply taking into account future scenarios. Besides
security of supply, also the competitiveness and the social welfare have to be
enhanced. As the transmission system investments are expensive, a balance
between system wide costs and benefits must be sought while designing the
future system [20].
2.3 The four W’s of the Transmission Expansion

Problem
The goal of transmission system expansion planning is to obtain the optimal

transmission expansion plan in a given future by maximizing the social welfare
or through a cost-benefit analysis considering future uncertainties. While
maximizing social welfare, a number of constraints have to be satisfied to
reach a defined level of security of supply. In its most general definition, the
transmission expansion plan has to provide an answer to the following four
main questions:
• Where to invest?
• What type of investment?
• When to invest?
• Who is going to pay for the investment?
2.3.1 Where to Invest?
The first question to be answered is where the future transmission system

investments must be realized: which transmission corridors or regions require
new or upgraded transmission infrastructure. The answer to this question
depends on the motivation of the transmission expansion. If the motivation is
maximization of revenues, e.g. for a merchant line, the optimal location of the
line might contradict with that from a TSO perspective.
Locating new transmission infrastructure is a problem with different geograph-
ical scales. Firstly, it is important to determine which transmission zones
(e.g. countries) to connect, in order to achieve the maximum social benefit in a
regional (multi-zonal) perspective. Optimization of investments needs between
multiple zones is mostly carried out using a market model and simplifying
the transmission grid typically to one or two nodes per zone (figure 2.1 -
left). The generation and demand within the countries are aggregated and
THE FOUR W’S OF THE TRANSMISSION EXPANSION PROBLEM 19
the interconnecting lines are reduced to one line per border using equivalent
impedances and transfer capacities. This way the optimization problem is
simplified and the calculations are typically carried out with a large number of
generators and loads over a time period of one or several years on an hourly
basis. Such a calculation delivers the additional capacity need between the
considered zones, allowing a regional optimum of social welfare.
Existing connections
New connections
Zone B
Zone A Zone B
Zone A
.
Zone C
Zone D Zone C Zone D
Figure 2.1: Determination of investment needs on a regional (left) and on

substation (right) level
If the investment need in the regional context is determined, the system can
be designed in such a way that the additionally required transmission capacity
between zones is reached. In order to achieve an optimal system design, the
question has to be answered, where to place actual lines and how to select their
rating, considering a number of technical, economic, social and environmental
constraints (figure 2.1 - right).
From purely technical perspective, the optimal location and rating of new lines
depend on the spatial and temporal distribution of generation and demand.
These distributions can be predicted accurately in the operational domain or
short term planning. In long term planning, their prediction is very difficult
due to uncertainties.
In case of demand, the spatial distribution mainly depends on the population
density and the concentration of heavy industry. The highest demand is
concentrated in large urban areas with high population density. Therefore,
the future spatial distribution can be predicted rather easily as it can take
several decades or even centuries until such demand centres are developed.
The temporal distribution of demand is mainly determined by the consumption
behaviour. On short and medium term, it is unlikely to change fundamentally.
The overall increase and decrease in consumption is related to the change in
GDP, which is a matter of several years. Nevertheless, there is a possibility

of extreme events (e.g. the mortgage crisis of 2008 or natural catastrophes),
causing sudden drops or increase in consumption. In a time frame of coming
decades, the consumption behaviour can change due to increased usage of
demand response and demand side management or increased use of electrical
vehicles. During the calculation of future transmission need, the behavioural
change should be modelled. In order to obtain robust scenarios for future
generation and demand, different policy measures leading to behavioural
change in electricity consumption should be considered.
In case of generation, the spatial and temporal distribution are linked.
The spatial distribution depends on the availability of energy resources.
Conventional power plants are ideally located near a supply point, where
the infrastructure allows easy transportation of primary energy resources
(e.g. lignite power plants near lignite mines or gas power plants near major
pipelines). In case of renewable generation, e.g. hydro, wind and solar energy,
the favourable locations are determined by the availability of the energy flows to
be harvested. As such, wind farms are ideally installed where the wind speeds
are high and less fluctuating. Although the best locations from a geographic
point of view are known, the actual location of future generation infrastructure
is still difficult to predict. Generation assets may be forced to be built at
different locations due to public opposition.
The choice of the primary energy resources is driven strongly by (geo-)political,
economic and environmental drivers. The temporal distribution of generation
depends as such on the decision of which energy resources to use. Conventional
generators can deliver power on demand. Except hydro or biomass, renewable
power generation depends on the availability of intermittent sources. As such,
the fluctuation in renewable generation causes uncertainty. Figures 2.2 and 2.3
show the predicted and actual wind infeed in the 50Hertz Transmission zone in
Germany for the first five months of 2014 [21] on an hourly basis. The installed
capacity of wind farms in that zone is approximately 14 GW. Although the
error between forecasted and actual wind in feed is in a band of ± 1000 MW, it
is clearly visible that the difference can reach values higher than 3 GW which
is more than 20 % of the installed wind capacity.
Another uncertainty in the temporal distribution is the market price for
electricity as well as the market prices for the primary energy sources, mainly
coal and gas 1 . Eventually, these prices determine together with demand, the
commitment of the power generating units. Power plants located in different
geographic regions are committed and de-committed in the market at different
1 It should be noted that different support schemes and regulations might influence or
disturb normal economics

12
. .Prediction
. .Infeed
10 . .Difference
6
GW
−2
−4 .
Jan. 2014 Feb. 2014 Mar. 2014 Apr. 2014 May. 2014
Figure 2.2: Predicted and actual wind in feed in the 50Hertz Transmission
zone January 2014 to May 2014 on an hourly basis. Installed wind capacity ca.
14 GW
points in time. As such, the temporal distribution of generation results in

a changing spatial distribution. Uncertainties in the temporal and spatial
distribution as well as their correlation have to be adequately considered by
the grid planner to allow a secure system design. In general, this happens
using different generation and demand scenarios or probabilistic power flow
calculations.
The right-of-way is another important decision criterion for the actual location
of transmission lines and cables. The route selection of new transmission
corridors may be coupled to other types of infrastructure such as railways,
roads, shipping routes and gas and oil pipelines while prohibited zones are
known such as natural reserves, water reservoirs or military installations.
Additionally, social acceptance of transmission system expansion is one of the
major influencing factors. Such decision criteria are very much case specific and
can decide if a transmission line (or cable) can be built or not and at which
price. In many cases, this leads to major delays in expansion projects. Such
issues are very difficult to be considered in generic transmission planning tools
and require expertise of the grid planner.
0
GW
−1
−2
−3
−4 ..
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500
hours
Figure 2.3: Difference between predicted and actual wind in feed in the
50 Transmission zone January 2014 to May 2014 hourly sorted. Installed wind
capacity ca. 14 GW
2.3.2 What type of investment?
The system planner can make two fundamental choices during system design
in terms of technology. The first is whether to use AC or DC transmission
and the second one being the use of overhead lines or cables. Additionally, the
power rating and the voltage level have to be determined.
In classical transmission system planning, high voltage AC overhead lines were
the technology considered first. High voltage AC overhead lines are a mature,
reliable and economic technology. However, underground cabling and HVDC
technology have gained a higher importance in today’s power system. In Asia,
South Africa and North and South America, HVDC links have been used for
long distance transmission to avoid stability issues and decrease losses. In
Europe where distances are relatively short, HVDC links were mainly used for
submarine connections between non-synchronous areas. Nevertheless, current
projects such as the Swedish south-west link, the Spain-France connection, the
Belgium-Germany connection or the British west link show that embedded
HVDC links are an attractive option for new transmission system investments
even within a synchronous area.
In the context of renewable energy goals of the European Union, HVDC

technology plays an important role. HVDC technology has virtually no
length limitation which enables the connection of distant offshore wind farms
with high power ratings to the existing onshore electricity system. Beyond
that, with the development of VSC technology and the possibility of multi-
terminal operation, HVDC connections can be operated in a meshed grid.
Meshed HVDC configurations connecting large offshore wind farms and several
countries can serve as a first step towards a pan-European super grid.
The choice of the type of investment depends mainly on the distance and
the desired power rating. The distance is a limiting factor for high voltage
AC transmission. For long (>500 km) overhead lines stability issues and
losses become a limiting factor. In case of underground cables, the high cable
capacitance and the resulting charging currents limit the feasible transmission
distance to some 10 to 100 km without intermediate compensation.
Besides the transmission distance, also the installation site can affect the
technology selection. Installation costs of transmission equipment are a
considerable part of the total investment. They depend on the spatial
properties of the area as well as land acquisition costs for the right of way.
Using one single installation cost for transmission equipment does not reflect
reality and can lead to suboptimal solutions in terms of routing and technology
choice. A key contribution of this thesis is that the developed methodology uses
area dependent installation costs to reflect spatial properties, land acquisition
and other social and environmental factors.
Another issue to be considered during technology choice is the lumpiness of
transmission investments. Installation costs can be considered as fixed in a
specific installation area (same altitude, same population density etc.), whereas
the investment costs depend on the power rating of the equipment. If the total
costs consisting of installation and investment are illustrated as a function of the
rating of the transmission system, an inverse dependence is obtained (figure 2.4).
The cost function has discontinuities at the maximum power rating of one
circuit of transmission equipment. If two different technologies are considered
(e.g. HVAC vs. HVDC technology), the location of the discontinuities varies
as different technologies have typically different maximum power ratings for
one circuit. Depending on the installation and investment costs for both
technologies as well as the power rating per circuit, different technologies can be
economically viable in a certain power range (figure 2.4). This can also result
in multiple break-even points between two technologies to be considered in the
technology selection. Therefore, the optimization of location, technology and
power rating should be performed together to avoid suboptimal transmission
grid layouts. This also means that any optimization result can be challenged
as small deviations from the initial assumptions can lead to different results.
Therefore, it is necessary to vary initial assumptions and perform sensitivity

analysis in order to obtain the most suitable result.
Cost [e/M W ] . .
Technology 1
. .
Technology 2
. Cheapest. option
P [MW]
Pmax,1 2 · Pmax,1 3 · Pmax,1
. Pmax,2 2 · Pmax,2
Figure 2.4: Transmission system investment costs [e /MW] for two different
technologies on the same transmission route [22]
2.3.3 When to Invest?
Every time a new transmission investment is done, the grid layout changes.
As a consequence of the change in impedances, the power flows in the
transmission system change as well. The part of the transmission system that
is most congested or which is the most prone to disturbances may shift to
other locations. As such, every transmission system investment affects future
investments.
Next to the topology change, there is an economic benefit of delaying
investments. As investments which can be realised at a later point in time
are economicly more beneficial, there is an incentive of postponing investments
as much as possible. From an economic point of view, investments can only be
postponed as far as security of supply is not jeopardized.
On the other hand, the process of investing in a new transmission asset can
take multiple years. Therefore, the decision to delay investments can be a very
difficult task given the uncertainties of future scenarios. As such it is required
to optimize the timing of transmission system investments, especially in the
long term, taking into account a number of uncertainties. Some of the scenario
uncertainties are:
• Generation
– Location
– Type
– Profile (including correlation with other sources)
• Demand
– Location
– Growth
– Profile
– Flexibility
• Technological developments
• Primary energy prices
• Raw material prices
There is an interdependency between location, type and timing of the

investment. As such, it is important to optimize the three parameters at the
same time while searching for the best expansion plan. Neglecting one of them
can result in a suboptimal system design.
2.3.4 Who pays for the investment?
The remuneration scheme for transmission system investments is an important

decision criterion as each investor expects sufficient return on investment.
There must be a correct financial incentive to invest. In case of investment
projects where more parties with different remuneration schemes are involved,
it can be difficult to find a compromise which can satisfy all. Also cases where
the benefits of the investment are not directly linked to the investor (e.g. when a
given investment mainly benefits a third country) require the correct incentives
in order to be built.
A clear example can be seen in the number of offshore investments in a given
country when comparing the connection charging regime. Depending on the
regulatory regime, it is the generator company (deep connection charges) or
the system developer (shallow or super shallow connection charges) that is
responsible to pay for the grid reinforcements. Depending on the “depth” of the
regulatory schemes, different grid layouts are obtained as the optimal solution.
In case of interconnecting systems, a harmonisation of the regulatory schemes
is needed to facilitate such investments.
Cross Border Investments
Cross border investments deserve special attention in transmission expansion

planning. As different TSOs of different countries are involved in the investment
decision, the decision making process is complicated. In principle, the goal of
such an investment is to maximize the overall social welfare. In most cases,
the maximum overall social welfare does not correspond with the sum of the
maximum welfare of both countries separately. For instance, a line maximizing
the welfare of country A does not maximize the welfare of country B and the
other way around. Therefore, investment decisions in inter-connectors may
result in a sub-optimum in terms of overall social welfare [23].
2.3.5 Other Influencing Factors
Besides the four “W’s” of transmission system planning, there are a number
of influencing factors putting additional constraints on the transmission
investment problem.
Security Constraints
There are two classes of security constraints, which have to be taken into
account in transmission grid planning. The first class deals with long term
security of supply related to investments to secure energy sources for a specific
area. The objectives of long term security of supply are decided on the political
level. For grid planners, the long term security of supply is rather an input than
a constraint. For instance, the connection of north African solar power plants
to Europe via sub-Mediterranean HVDC links could help to supply Europe
with renewable energy on the long term and reduce its dependency on fossil
fuels [12–14]. At the same time Europe’s dependence on resources outside
Europe will increase which might result in a security of supply problem in
return. The same holds for the connection of large scale wind power from the
North Sea [11]. The decision to realize such major investment projects have to
be made following a long term vision. The task of the grid planner is to develop
an investment sequence to enable the integration of these energy sources into
the existing system.
Security constraints play a major role during the selection of location, rating
and type of new investments. Currently, different deterministic criteria such
as the N-1, N-1-1, N-2 criteria are applied in transmission ssytem planning.
The N-1 criterion states that the transmission system is still operable after the
failure of one critical element, e.g. a transmission line or a large generator.
The N-1-1 criterion refers to common mode failures, where a second failure
as a consequence of a previous failure can be tolerated by the system. The
N-2 criterion states that two independent failures can be handled by the
transmission system. In future, diverse probabilistic security criteria can be
used in the planning process. The choice of the security constraint(s) influences
the final layout of the system. The stricter the security criteria, the more
redundancy is required, resulting in a higher number of parallel paths or a
higher degree of meshing.
Technology Development
On the very long term there might be considerable changes and developments
in available technology. Technology options such as storage, super conductivity,
unconventional renewable energy (geothermal, wave energy, etc.) might change
the way the electricity system is built and operated. Here, no technological
developments are taken into account. In section 6 of this work, the effects of
using higher power ratings of transmission technology on the final grid topology
and the total system costs is analysed qualitatively.
Social Constraints
One of the biggest hurdles for new transmission infrastructure projects is the
public opposition mostly related to the visual impact and electromagnetic field
exposure. In many cases, TSOs are forced to put new transmission assets
underground increasing the costs significantly. Another reason for under-
grounding can be that there is no suitable right-of-way available without
violating the limits for electric and magnetic field exposure. The requirement
to use underground cables affects the technology selection as high voltage AC
underground cables have a limited transmission distance and capacity.
It is very important to incorporate the public opposition in the initial phase
of the planning where technology selection and line routing are determined.
Belated changes in transmission technology or line routing delay the permission,
construction and commissioning process significantly which eventually results
in additional costs and may lead to failure of the whole project in some cases.
2.3.6 Transmission Grid Planning in the Liberalized Context
Before the liberalization of the electricity markets, transmission planning and

generation expansion planning were carried out by a common planning entity.
In the classical scheme, the objective was the minimization of investment and
operational costs while fulfilling security constraints as the benefits were fixed.
In the liberalized market, where generation and transmission companies are
different entities, planning is done separately. The main difference is that
the objective of the planning is the maximization of profits as opposed to
minimization of costs in vertically integrated monopolies. This puts additional
complexity and uncertainty in the transmission planning. On hand generation
companies try to maximize their profits. Transmission system operators have
the responsibility to minimize their costs in order to increase social welfare. On
the other hand, if listed on the stock market, transmission system operators
need to fulfil their responsibilities towards their shareholders as well. As a third
dimension, the revenues of TSOs are determined by national regulating bodies
who might have again different objectives, incentives and agendas, further
complicating the decision making process of transmission investments.
On top of the involved parties having different objectives, there is additional
uncertainty for generation as well as transmission companies. As transmission
companies are obliged2 to connect new generation units in their zone, they
risk stranded investments, in case the generation project is severely delayed
or not realized. A similar risk exists for the generation company, in case the
construction and commissioning process for the transmission system is delayed.
In that case, the generation company loses revenues due to lack of transmission
capacity. Therefore, in current transmission system planning risk assessment
gains increasing importance.
2.4 Transmission Expansion Optimization Method-

ologies
Transmission expansion planning is an optimization problem which can be

formulated in different ways depending on the objective of the optimization
and the level of abstraction. Due to its complexity, generally, the optimization
problem is defined as a two step problem (figure 2.5). The upper level, also
called investment or master problem, determines the topology of the expansion.
The optimization algorithm determines which nodes in the network should be
connected or which lines reinforced. The objective of the investment problem is
the minimization of the investment costs. In the lower level called operational
or slave problem, usually the power ratings of the connections proposed by the
investment problem are optimized with the objective of minimizing operational
2 This "obligation" can differ in different zones and is subjected to generator connection
requirements
TRANSMISSION EXPANSION OPTIMIZATION METHODOLOGIES 29
costs. In the operational problem, grid constraints such as voltage magnitude

and angle limits as well as security constraints can be taken into account. By
feeding back the solution of the operational problem, the investment problem
is updated until convergence between both sub-problems is reached.
.
Investment problem
Operational problem
Figure 2.5: Structure of transmission expansion optimization problem
The formulation of the transmission expansion optimization problem depends

on the desired objective and the solution methodology. In general, the
transmission expansion problem can be classified according to solution methods,
planning time horizon and structure of the analysed power system [24].
Additionally, each transmission expansion problem can be formulated in a
deterministic or a probabilistic way.
2.4.1 Classification by Solution Method
In general, the transmission expansion problem can be solved using mathemat-

ical or heuristic optimization techniques. The combination of mathematical
optimization and heuristics are the so called meta-heuristics frequently used
for transmission expansion optimization.
Mathematical Optimization Methods
Mathematical solution methods require the description of the optimization

problem by a closed set of equations. The formulation consists of an objective
function and a set of constraints, which reflect imposed technical, economic
and reliability criteria. The problem is solved using classical methods of
optimization such as linear programming (LP) [25–30], dynamic programming
(DP) [31], non linear programming (NLP) [32], mixed-integer programming
(MIP) [33–40], Benders’ decomposition [41–44] and hierarchical decomposition

methods [45].
The above mentioned solution methods have different properties in terms of
convergence and computational efficiency. As such, it is important to choose the
solution methodology which suits the abstraction level of the defined problem.
If an LP optimization is used, either a transportation model is chosen [25] or
the power flow equations are linearised. Using a transportation model, the
investment problem is decoupled from the network equations. In that case, the
flows on new built lines are considered as known without having to account
for the network impedances. Using non-linear optimization methods, the non-
linear network equations can be accounted for, such that voltage magnitude
limits and transmission losses can be represented. Additionally, non-linearities
in the cost function can be taken into account leading to a more accurate cost
representation.
On the other hand, non-linear mathematical solution methods have often
convergence problems due to the non-convex nature of the transmission
expansion problem. Using an appropriate solver for the problem is essential in
mathematical optimization methods. Often, a reformulation or simplification
of the problem statement is needed in order to use commercial solvers. Another
issue is that high computation times are required as there can be several
local optima in the search space. To limit the high computational burden,
the optimization problems usually must be simplified. As such, the obtained
solutions have to be verified for feasibility in a more complete model.
Transmission system investments are lumpy by nature. First of all, transmis-
sion lines or cables can only be built by using a discrete number of circuits.
Additionally, the number of conductors per phase as well as the available cross-
sections of conductors are of discrete nature. To represent the lumpiness of
transmission investments, integer optimization variables are used. In general,
integer optimization performs worse in terms of convergence and computational
speed compared to continuous optimization and many solvers can’t deal with
such problems or need to revert to slower computation routines. Therefore
it is popular to define the optimization problem as a continuous one and
approximate the power rating to the closest discrete value after obtaining the
solution.
Heuristics
Heuristic methods are based on the step-by-step solution of the transmission

expansion problem using a predefined set of rules. To do so, at each iteration
new expansion alternatives are generated, evaluated and selected. This can
TRANSMISSION EXPANSION OPTIMIZATION METHODOLOGIES 31
be done with or without user interaction. These heuristic methods use local
searches based on logical or empirical rules and sensitivities to limit the search
space [24]. The search is performed until no better solutions are found.
Optimization methods based on heuristics mostly consider investment costs,
operational costs and energy not served in the objective function.
There are several heuristic methods, such as adjoin network [46], sensitivity
analysis [47–53], overload networks [25, 26, 28], decision trees [54], genetic
algorithms [55–61], simulated annealing [62, 63], expert systems [64–66], fuzzy
set theory [67], greedy randomized adaptive search [41], tabu search [68–70],
particle swarm optimization [71] and multi objective meta heuristics [72, 73].
Game theory [74–77] based methods can also be seen as heuristic. In game
theory-based methods, the interaction of different agents based on predefined
rules are mimicked. This way, it is possible to find solutions acceptable for all
agents.
2.4.2 Classification by Planning Horizon
Transmission expansion problems can generally be separated into two classes

regarding the planning horizon: static and dynamic. Static problems are solved
only for one specific point in time, intermediate time points being neglected.
All aforementioned methods can be used for this kind of optimization problem.
Referring to section 2.3, these kind of expansion problems only answer the
questions where to invest and what type of investments to choose.
The expansion problem gets dynamic, if multiple time steps are considered.
In this case, next to sizing of new investments also timing along the whole
planning horizon is optimized [24]. Methods to solve such problems are
currently sufficiently developed and often require significant simplifications
or have serious restrictions [78]. In [30–32, 38, 39, 79, 80], such problems are
described.
To simplify dynamic problems, the algorithm can be performed for multiple
sequential (and discrete) steps. This way, a pseudo-dynamic problem is
created. Such pseudo-dynamic problems can be solved with two natural
decompositions: forward and backward methods. In the forward method
[81], the problem is sequentially solved, where the starting point is the first
year of the planning horizon considered. In the backward methods, first an
optimization is performed for the last year of the planning horizon. To solve the
problem in the intermediate years the information of the “future” investments
are used. The backward method delivers in general better results [24]. The
forward and backward method can be combined when the problem at every
time step is solved in both directions.
Dynamic and pseudo-dynamic problems require large computational effort due

to the large number of variables, growing with the length of the planning
horizon. In general, heuristic methods are used to solve dynamic and pseudo-
dynamic problems.
2.4.3 Classification by Market Structure
Before the liberalization of the electricity markets, the objective of the

transmission expansion planning had been to minimize the life cycle costs of
the generation and transmission system while considering security constraints.
After liberalization, the electricity market structure has changed, causing
multiple and potentially competing objectives.
As mentioned in the previous section, generation and transmission planning can
have contradicting objectives which complicates the decision making process.
In that context different entities can have different view points in the following
issues [24].
• Definition of the objective function (minimum transmission system

operation costs, maximum cost-benefit ratio, global welfare, lowest
congestion etc.)
• Interaction between transmission and generation expansion planning
• Definition of criteria to choose a specific expansion plan
• Assessment of different expansion options
• Flexibility requirements of the transmission planning process
• Relation between investments and pricing
• Optimization of existing network utilization
• Introduction of flexible transmission devices
• Definition of the highest uncertainty level for the planning
• Review of reliability, security and quality criteria
2.4.4 Deterministic vs. Non-Deterministic Expansion Prob-

lems
The classical transmission expansion planning is performed in a deterministic

way. In general, several worst case scenarios are created and the transmission
TRANSMISSION SYSTEM PLANNING IN PRACTISE 33
system planning is carried out such that security criteria are fulfilled during
when the worst case occurs. Such approaches might lead to overinvestments as
the the probability of occurrence of such a scenario is very low. On the other
hand, the quality of the expansion plan heavily depends on the quality of the
worst case scenario. The negation of important scenarios may lead to under
investments and to curtailment of load if these cases occur.
Due to increasing number of uncertainties such as renewable generation and
flexible loads, probabilistic transmission expansion planning gains popularity.
Instead of using fixed load and generation values in certain scenarios, both are
modelled with probability density functions. The probability of exceeding line
limits in certain expansion plans can be determined and monetized.
Using those techniques, also security criteria can be redefined in a probabilistic
way to replace the classical (N-1) security criterion. Using proper risk
assessment the costs to avoid low probability failures and the economic
consequences in case of occurrence can be compared to each other. This
way, over investments in assets which do not significantly contribute to system
security can be avoided.
Monte Carlo simulation is the current "standard" for probabilistic planning
approaches. It requires large computational effort due to the large number
of sample cases. Therefore, it is mostly applied for conceptual study cases
in small grids. Especially for large grids with a high number of nodes, the
definition of the probability density functions for load and generation as well
as the definition of security criteria play a major role and deserve research
priority to develop more efficient modelling techniques.
2.5 Transmission system planning in practise
In practise, the identification of investment needs in transmission systems is

an iterative process (figure 2.6). In the first step, a market based assessment
is made optimizing the dispatch of power generation units on an hourly basis.
In the market based assessment, usually a DC load flow approximation with
a small number of nodes or a one node per country approach is used [82, 83].
The one node country approach assumes that there is no internal congestion
within a zone (country or region) such that all generation and demand can be
aggregated to one node. Between the zones, a limited grid transfer capacity is
used which is calculated using the capacities of cross-border lines and important
lines within the zones. Based on the marked analysis, inter-zonal investment
needs care determined. The market analysis takes availability and flexibility of
generation units into account as well as wind, solar and load profiles [78,82–85].
Based on the outcome of the market analysis, a network study is performed,

where a simplified representation of demand and generation profiles are used
[82, 83]. Network studies take internal congestion and loop flows into account
such that investment needs within the transmission zones can be identified.
In network studies, a number of specific planning cases are used representing
the most problematic situations in the transmission grid [82, 83]. Based on
the network studies, grid planners propose possible reinforcements to solve the
identified problems. The potential costs and benefits of proposed solutions are
determined in order to find the most suitable grid investments. Eventually, new
grid transfer capabilities are determined including the best reinforcements and
used as input for the next iteration (figure 2.6). The best transmission grid
reinforcements are determined through further iteration of the process until the
proposed solutions prevent all critical situations.
.
Market analysis
Inter-zonal capacity need

Nodal generation and load profiles
Network analysis
Problem cases
Identification of
best reinforcements
Proposal of reinforcements
Implementation in the model

and cost benefit analysis
Grid transfer capacities
Figure 2.6: Structure of transmission system planning in practise

STRUCTURE OF THE PROPOSED TRANSMISSION EXPANSION OPTIMIZATION METHODOLOGY 35
2.6 Structure of the Proposed Transmission Expan-

sion Optimization Methodology
As elaborated in the previous sections, transmission expansion planning has to

deal with a large number of variables, influencing factors and uncertainties. In
order to find the global optimal investment sequence for the considered planning
horizon and a considered area, a complete transmission expansion optimization
methodology has to account for:
• Temporal distribution of generation and demand in the entire network

for the entire planning horizon
• Spatial distribution of generation and demand in the entire network for
the entire planning horizon
• Long term and short term security of supply
• All current and future technologies for grid expansion
• Spatial, social and environmental aspects of the entire considered area
(e.g. Europe)
A key shortcoming of available planning methodologies is that the probabilistic

nature of renewable generation and demand is not considered. For large
transnational investments, robustness is essential. If the transmission system
planning is scenario based, both over- or underinvestment may occur as scenario
studies may easily overestimate future generation capacities. At the same time,
they could miss extreme cases of flow that require specific reinforcement [86].
This thesis introduces a long term transmission system expansion optimization
methodology where the probabilistic nature of generation and demand are
taken into account. In this thesis an investment optimization methodology
is introduced taking spatial aspects and different technology options for new
investments and their interdependency into account. The spatial aspects are
important to monetize social and environmental impact of new investments to
allowing a direct comparison and transparent cost benefit analysis of different
projects [86].
This would require that the optimization methodology is able to model all
generators and all lines in a time period of several decades together with a set of
possible expansion technologies and a full social-environmental representation.
This would result in a huge number of optimization and state variables.
Therefore, it is necessary to divide the optimization problem into several
virtually decoupled layers. Each layer can be solved in a more simplified
and efficient way. Eventually, these layers have to interact with each other
and exchange some dedicated information and solve the expansion problem
iteratively. In this way the influence of different parameters on different layers
and also on the final optimization result can be analysed.
The structure of the proposed long term transmission expansion optimization
methodology is shown in figure 2.7. To allow easy integration in existing
planning tools and allow user interaction, this specific structure is chosen.
The first step of the planning methodology consists of the market analysis
(Interconnection Level) as it is common practise. The market analysis delivers
the necessary input for a probabilistic network analysis (Network Abstraction)
and investment optimization (Substation Level). In classical transmission
system planning methodologies the identification of necessary investments is
carried out by the grid planner. In the proposed methodology, new investments
are identified using optimization techniques such that different technology
options and spatial properties can be taken into account. This extends the
search space for identification beyond the experience of the grid planner while
accelerating the identification process for new investments.
The different building blocks are described briefly in the following sections. The
scope of this thesis is the network abstraction and the substation level marked
grey in figure 2.7.
. Interconnection level
Optimization of interconnection
Generation cost information
capacities with market based
optimization for each time point
Network abstraction
Optimal
Calculation of maximum
interconnection
power injection capabilities
capacity, P inter
Substation level
Optimization of topology,
technology and route of
interconnections for each time Maximum power injection
⃗ M P IC
capabilities, X
point
Minimum transmission
investment costs
Figure 2.7: Structure of the proposed long term transmission expansion

optimization methodology
2.6.1 Interconnetion level
The interconnection level determines the capacity needs between multiple zones,
considering future generation and demand scenarios to enable the long term
security of supply. The objective of the optimization is to find the best
interconnection capability between multiple zones maximizing overall social
welfare. Based on expected generation, demand and cost information, the
optimal inter-zonal transmission capacities are calculated (figure 2.8).
.
Expected generation capacity and type
Expected generation
Expected cost of generation
Interconnection
Expected demand profiles Expected generation cost
level
Existing grid transfer capacity
Required interconnection capacity
Average cost of transmission
Figure 2.8: Main input and output parameters of the interconnection level
In general, a high number of generation and demand profiles are analysed,

e.g hourly profiles over multiple years. Hence, the optimization problem should
be defined as simply as possible in order to avoid convergence problems and
long calculation times. In such market based optimization methods, zones
(e.g. countries) are mostly modelled using one aggregated node, neglecting the
internal power flows and possible contingencies. The existing interconnections
between the zones are modelled using a transport model or actual equivalent
impedances between the zones to account for actual flows. Investment costs in
transmission systems are modelled using simplified cost functions. The average
costs used are mostly given in e/M W , e/(M W · km) or e/(M W · km · a)
depending on the chosen level of detail and time horizon.
The output of the interconnection level is the optimal interconnection capacity
used as input in the substation level and generation cost information used in
the network abstraction level. In case a (pseudo) dynamic approach is chosen,
the interconnection capabilities for all considered investment time points have
to be provided. The interconnection level is not in the scope of this thesis as a
large number of such market based tools exist to address it [78, 87].
2.6.2 Network Abstraction
Using the input coming from the interconnection level, an optimization

algorithm can be written to determine optimal placement and rating of new
assets to achieve the desired interconnection power. Nevertheless, if the existing

transmission system is modelled with its full detail, the number of optimization
and state variables increases significantly. If technology selection, route and
timing of the investments are optimized, the large number of variables become
a burden. As such, an abstraction from the existing network is created to
decouple the optimization of technology, topology, routing and timing of new
investments from the existing network.
The principle of the network abstraction and the main input and output
parameters is shown in figures 2.9 and 2.10 respectively. In the network,
the existing network is presented as a possible set of allowable injections and
absorptions. They are determined considering probabilistic distribution of
generation and demand as well as existing line limits. The determined injection
capabilities indicate the maximum amount of power which can be injected or
absorbed at a single node of the system without causing any overload. Based
on the maximum power injection capabilities, a set of strong nodes can be
selected which are used for the further optimization at substation level, rather
than the entire set of nodes in the transmission system. The set of nodes can be
chosen depending on the injection capability itself as well as on geographic or
other constraints. This reduces the number of optimization variables drastically
resulting in better convergence and faster computation. The determination of
the injection capabilities are elaborated in chapter 3.
Existing grid Abstract Network
Figure 2.9: Principle of network abstraction
2.6.3 Substation level
Using the required inter-zonal transmission capacities as well the maximum

power injection capabilities, the optimization of investments on the substation
.
Expected generation Candidate nodes
Expected generation cost Maximum power import capacity

Network
Expected demand profiles Abstraction Maximum power export capacity
Network data Change in import/export capacity
Figure 2.10: Main input and output parameters of the network abstraction
level can be carried out. In this optimization it is determined which substations

have to be connected to achieve the desired interconnection capabilities in
the most economic way. Therefore, the technology (AC, DC, overhead lines,
underground cables) and rating (number of circuits, conductors and their cross
sections) of each connection are optimized. Figure 2.11 shows the main input
and output parameters.
The optimization considers area dependent installation costs and finds the
cheapest transmission route in combination with the chosen technology. This
way soft constraints such as social and environmental impact can be included
in these area dependent costs. When multiple investment time steps are
considered, the investment time point of each connection is determined. Using
additional constraints, the impact of construction delays and availability of
multi-terminal HVDC operation is analysed.
As averaged transmission investment costs are used at the interconnection level,
it is important to iteratively combine the substation and the interconnection
level. After determining the minimal costs on the substation level over the
entire planning horizon, these costs can be averaged, annualized and used
in the interconnection level. Depending on the updated costs, in the next
iterations, the interconnection capability might change in such a way that
several iterations have to be performed between both. As the generation profiles
might change, maximum power injection capabilities have to be recalculated
for each iteration between the interconnection and the substation level (see
figure 2.7).
The optimization on substation level as well as the iteration between levels is
studied in chapters 4 and 5.
.
Candidate nodes Optimal topology
Maximum import/export capacities Optimal ratings

Substation
Change in import/export capacities Optimal routing
level
Equipment cost data Optimal technology
Geographic/demographic data Transmission system cost
Figure 2.11: Main input and output parameters of the substation level
Chapter 3
Maximum Power Injection

Capabilities
I believe that we do not know anything for certain, but everything probably -
Christiaan Huygens
3.1 Introduction
New transmission system investments have to be compatible with the existing

transmission network. This means that no new overload situations should
occur in the network if a new transmission connection is built. The search
space for transmission system investment optimization consists of scenarios for
investment options. To optimize transmission grid investments on a regional
level (e.g. continental), a representation of the entire system is required to make
sure that new investments are compatible with the existing grid. This results
in a very large number of variables as the power flow equations for the entire
network have to be solved during each optimization step. Therefore, it is helpful
to reduce the grid investment options by a pre-selection of candidate nodes by
determining the effects of power injections and off-takes in these candidate
nodes on the rest of the network. This way, the optimization problem can
be defined independent of the existing network simplifying the problem. This
chapter provides a methodology to pre-select candidate nodes and to represent
them as a set of possible injection capabilities.
The connection of a large wind farm to the existing grid is depicted in figure 3.1.
41
42 MAXIMUM POWER INJECTION CAPABILITIES
The injected power is distributed among the transmission lines of the grid
according to the demand in each node, injections from other generation units
and the impedance of transmission lines. The optimal connection point for the
wind farm would be a strong node nearby, which allows the maximum amount
of power injected without causing congestion. Not every substation is able
to cope with such high amounts of injected power. First of all, the additional
power injection may require additional equipment such as transformers, FACTS
devices or switchgear or the replacement of existing equipment to fulfil short-
circuit power requirements. In case sufficient space is available, such extensions
can be installed easily. More importantly, the power injected or withdrawn in
a specific node has to be transported by the existing transmission grid in order
to supply loads. Investing to reinforce local existing transmission lines can be
difficult and expensive [88]. This can be a reason to connect new generators
not necessarily to the closest connection point but further away, where no
additional investments would be needed or less problems are foreseen.
Existing grid
.
OWF connected to a weaker node
OWF connected to a strong node
Figure 3.1: Effect of connecting a large offshore wind farm to the existing grid (darker colour
indicates higher power flow)
By calculating the amount of power injected in each node, a set of candidate

nodes can be chosen depending on the power injection capability and
transmission distance. The identification of such strong nodes is not trivial,
as several factors such as different demand and generation profiles, the location
of generation and demand, import and export situations or line outages
influence the maximum power injection capability in nodes and the reserves
on transmission lines for additional transport of power.
In case the dispatch of future generation units and hourly load profiles are
provided, the maximum power injection capability can be determined using
power flow calculations. In this chapter a calculation methodology is developed
which identifies the maximum power injection capability (MPIC) based on a
probabilistic optimal power flow for the case that future generation and load
information is not provided as a time series. Next to identification of strong
CALCULATION OF MAXIMUM POWER INJECTION CAPABILITIES 43
nodes, also weak links are identified, as these are the most likely to show
congestion and therefore the first candidates for future reinforcements. This
chapter is based on [89] and is structured as follows. The overall structure of the
developed methodology is provided. A formulation for the optimal power flow
calculation (OPF) is provided which is used in the remainder of the chapter.
Next, a comparison between AC and DC OPF in terms of accuracy is provided.
The application of the Gaussian Component Combination Method (GCCM) is
shown to take the probabilistic nature of demand and renewable generation
into account and compared to Monte Carlo Simulation in terms of accuracy.
Further, the effects of considering the N-1 security criterion and power flow
controlling devices, namely phase shifting transformers (PST) and HVDC links
are discussed.
The methodology is developed and implemented in Matlab and all power flow
and optimal power flow calculations are performed using Matpower [90].
3.2 Calculation of maximum power injection capa-

bilities
The developed methodology aims to calculate the maximum power injection

capability to serve as input for the optimization of transmission system
investments. It is calculated such that no overload situations can occur in the
existing network. During the procedure the probabilistic nature of generation
and demand is taken into account.
The aim of the developed methodology is to deliver two vectors P⃗M +
P IC and
⃗ −
PM P IC which contain the maximum power injection and absorption capabilities
of investigated nodes. P⃗M + ⃗−
P IC and PM P IC express how much power can be
imported into a node and exported from a node without causing any overload
situations in the existing transmission grid. As larger injections or absorptions
than P⃗M
+ ⃗−
P IC and PM P IC cause overload in the existing grid, the power injection
and absorption capabilities can be seen as capacity limits for new connected
transmission lines, generation units or loads.
Every injection in a particular node influences the power flows in the grid
and therefore the maximum power injection capability of other nodes. This
effect has to be considered during the optimization of line ratings for future
investments. Therefore, a matrix ∆M P IC is calculated which represents the
change in the maximum power injection capability in each selected node in
dependence of injections in each selected node. During the operation of the
power system, the injection in a node x can take any value between zero and
its power injection capability. As such, the matrix
 
∆1,1,1 ∆1,2,1 ... ∆1,N,1 ... ∆1,N,M
 ∆2,1,1 ∆2,2,1 ... ∆2,N,1 ... ∆2,N,M

∆M P IC =  .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.  (3.1)
. . . . . .
∆N,1,1 ∆N,2,1 ... ∆N,N,1 ... ∆N,N,M
has to be defined for multiple power injections. ∆i,j,k indicates the change
in power flow. N is the number of selected nodes, whereas M is the chosen
number of different power injections. The size of ∆M P IC is (N × N · M ). The
columns of ∆M P IC indicate nodes where power is injected, whereas its rows
indicate affected nodes.
The power injection capability is bidirectional. Therefore, four matrices have to
be calculated in order to describe the change in power injection and absorption
capabilities as a result of injections and absorptions in other nodes (figure 3.2).
The definition of the four matrices is as follows:
• ∆i,i
M P IC : change in the power injection capability due to injections in
other nodes,
• ∆i,a
M P IC : change in the power injection capability due to absorptions in
other nodes,
• ∆a,i
M P IC : change in the power absorption capability due to injections in
other nodes,
• ∆a,a
M P IC : change in the power absorption capability due to absorptions in
other nodes,
As the power injections in the transmission grid vary, P⃗M + ⃗−

P IC and PM P IC
can have different values for each injection pattern. Therefore, probabilistic
methods have to be used in order to calculate a range for P⃗M + ⃗−
P IC and PM P IC .
Figure 3.2 shows the general structure of the developed methodology. First,
generation and load data is processed where samples to approximate the
probabilistic nature of generation and demand are created. Also possible
power flow controlling devices are added to the system and modelled according
section 3.6. Secondly, a pre-selection of candidate nodes is performed by
calculating their connection capability as elaborated in section 3.4.4. Next,
the line overload distribution factors of the system are calculated used for the
N-1 calculation (section 3.5). Eventually, the maximum power injection and
absorption capability is determined using the Gaussian component combination
method (see section 3.4.2) taking into account N-1 security and possible power
flow controlling devices.
OPTIMAL POWER FLOW FORMULATION 45
.
Process network data: Create
samples and add power flow
controlling devices
∆i,i
M P IC
Calculate connection capability ∆i,a
M P IC
and preselect nodes ∆a,i
M P IC
∆a,a
M P IC
Calculate γ-matrix
⃗+
Calculate P ⃗−
M P IC , PM P IC
Figure 3.2: Structure of methodology to calculate maximum power injection capabilities
3.3 Optimal power flow formulation
Optimal power flow calculations are used to determine the optimal state of
the system minimizing a given objective function. The power flow equations,
Kirchhoff’s current and voltage laws have to be satisfied. Although the
objective function can be virtually anything, in most applications, the objective
is the minimization of operational costs, consisting of generation costs, costs
for losses and cost of energy not served. In the unbundled system, the
typical objective is maximization of profits. Typical additional optimization
constraints are current and voltage limits of equipment, stability limits in the
grid and security constraints.
In this chapter the OPF formulation is used where the sum of active and
reactive power generation costs in the considered area is minimized
∑
ng
min fpi (pig ) + fqi (qgi ) (3.2)
i=1
where ng is the number of generators in the system, fpi (pig ) the active power
generation cost of generator i, pg the active power injection, fqi (qgi ) the active
power generation cost of generator i and qg the reactive power injection [90].
The optimization is subject to the load balance in each node which represents
the Kirchhoff equations
0 = Pbus (Θ, Vm ) + Pd − Pg (3.3a)
0 = Qbus (Θ, Vm ) + Qd − Qg (3.3b)
where Pbus (Θ, Vm ) and Qbus (Θ, Vm ) are the sum of the active and reactive
power flows, P (d) and Q(d) the reactive power demand and Pg and Qg are the
sum of active and reactive power injections in each node.
Additional inequality constraints are line flow limits representing the thermal
line limits
Fmin ≤ Ff (Θ, Vm ) ≤ Fmax (3.4a)
Fmin ≤ Ft (Θ, Vm ) ≤ Fmax (3.4b)
where Fmin and Fmax are the upper and lower power flow limits and Ff (Θ, Vm )
and Ft (Θ, Vm ) are the power flows in both positive and negative direction
respectively.
Also voltage magnitude and angle limits are constrained in order to account
for insulation limits and static stability
θii,min ≤ θi ≤ θii,max ∀i (3.5a)

i,min
vm ≤ vm
i
≤ vm
i,max
∀i (3.5b)
where θii,min and θii,max are the upper and lower phase angle limits, θi the actual
i,min i,max
phase phase angle, vm and vm the upper and lower voltage magnitude
i
limits and vm the actual voltage magnitude.
Another constraint concerns generator active and reactive power limits to
account for current and voltage limits in generators as well as the limits for
mechanical and thermal stress of generation units
Pgi,min ≤ Pgi ≤ Pgi,max ∀i (3.6a)
Qi,min
g ≤ Qig ≤ Qi,max
g ∀i (3.6b)
where P i,min and P i,max are the maximum and minimum allowable active
power generation, Pgi the actual active power generation, Qi,min and Qi,max
are the maximum and minimum allowable reactive power generation and Qig is
the actual reactive power generation of node i.
Equations (3.4a) and (3.4b) show that the power flow on each line is a function
of the bus voltage magnitude and phase angle. On the other hand, bus voltage
magnitudes and phase angles are determined by the active and reactive power
injections (3.3a) and (3.3b) and the resulting voltage drops in the transmission
lines. Therefore, the power flow problem has to be solved using an iterative
approach. Additionally, convergence problems may occur in case the starting
point for the iterative calculation is not chosen wisely or if the system matrix
is close to singularity [91].
If all voltage magnitudes are assumed to be equal and the sine of voltage
angle differences is approximated by the angle differences themselves, the
power flow equations can be linearised. This simplification is called DC power
flow calculation [91]. If DC power flow calculation is used, the equations
regarding reactive power can be eliminated from the objective function and
the constraints of the OPF formulation result in:
∑
ng
min fpi (pig ) (3.7a)
i=1
s.t. 0 = Pbus (Θ) + Pd − Cg Pg (3.7b)
Fmin ≤ Ff (Θ) ≤ Fmax (3.7c)
Fmin ≤ Ft (Θ) ≤ Fmax (3.7d)
θii,min ≤ θi ≤ θii,max (3.7e)
Pgi,min ≤ pig ≤ Pgi,max (3.7f)

This simplification is justified in transmission grids as the voltage magnitude

and angle differences between grid nodes are small. The main advantage of
using DC power flow formulation is that the problem is linearised and solved
with a matrix multiplication instead of an iterative solution as with AC power
flow. The DC power flow calculation always finds a solution as it solved with
a matrix multiplication. In the OPF formulation, the optimization constraints
are linearised whereby simpler and faster optimization solvers can be used. This
reduces the computation time for the optimization drastically and also has a
positive influence on convergence of the optimization algorithm.
To calculate the maximum power injection capability to import power into a
particular node x, the objective functions as provided by (3.2) and (3.7a) have
to be extended. An additional term subtracts the injection in node x from the
total generation costs using a conversion factor K.
∑
ng
min fpi (pig ) + fqi (qgi ) − Kpxg (3.8a)
i=1
∑
ng
min fpi (pig ) − Kpxg (3.8b)
i=1
In case the generation costs in node x are set equal to or lower than all other
generators, the injection in node x is maximized while respecting the constraints
(3.3a - 3.6b) respectively (3.7b - 3.7f). Such an assumption is acceptable in case
node x is selected as connection point of a large wind farm or an interconnector
to a neighbouring grid. In case of a wind farm, the marginal generation costs
would be near zero and in case of injection from another grid, electricity would
be imported, which implies that the costs in the importing grid have to be
higher than or equal these of imported energy. The conversion factor K
is used to weigh both objectives: minimization of generation costs and the
maximization of the injection in node x. Figure 3.3 illustrates the effect of the
factor K on the both objectives. If a large value is chosen for factor K, the
objective of maximizing the injection outweighs that of minimizing the total
generation costs and vice versa. Depending on the chosen value of the factor
K, the obtained solution moves along a Pareto front. Hence, the absolute value
of K should be chosen carefully, considering cost of generation.
To calculate the maximum power absorption capability, the upper generation
limits of the generator in node x has to be set to zero. In that case, a negative
value has to be used for the conversion factor K.
Maximizing injections
Optimal solutions
Large K
Small K
Minimizing generation costs
Figure 3.3: Effect of the weight factor K on prioritizing the objectives of

minimizing generation costs versus maximizing injections
The result of the optimal power flow calculation delivers the maximum
power injection capability. Additionally, the result of the optimal power
flow calculation can be used to determine weak paths in transmission grids.
Obviously, no line overloads can occur if the optimal power flow calculation
converges due to the thermal line limit constraint (3.4a - 3.4b and 3.7c - 3.7d).
Nevertheless, the lines operated at or near their thermal limits can easily be
identified. The lines operated most frequently near their thermal limits are the
most likely ones to be overloaded in case the injection in node x exceeds the
calculated maximum power injection capability.
In the following paragraphs a comparison between AC OPF and DC OPF is
made while calculating maximum power injection capabilities. The calculations
are carried out on a modified version of the IEEE 118 bus test system
(figure 3.4). The node x is varied between all nodes in the system in order to
compare the maximum power injection capabilities. In this modified version,
radial connections are eliminated and the network is reduced to 109 nodes.
Thus allowing to consider the N-1 security criterion (section 3.5). In case there
are radial connections with single circuit lines, the maximum power injection
capability would be zero, as there is always one disconnected node in the N-1
case causing non-convergence during the OPF calculation.
It is assumed that 3 wind generators are situated at buses 10, 57 and 71,
with zero marginal costs. Line limits for the lines and transformers are set
Figure 3.4: Modified IEEE 118 bus system, thick, red lines indicate lines equipped with PSTs
respectively replaced by HVDC connections in section 3.6
to 500 MVA and 250 MVA at respectively the 345 kV and 138 kV level. To
determine the strongest node, at each iteration, a different node x is equipped
with a generator at marginal cost equal to wind generators. The load level of
each bus is varied between 75% and 125% of the base values defined for the
IEEE 118 bus test system [92], resulting in 50 different load cases.
Figure 3.5 shows the relative difference between the M P IC in each node
between using AC and DC OPF calculation. The figure shows that on average
0,46% higher values are achieved with AC OPF. Except for one bus, the relative
difference between both methods is below 10%. On the buses with the highest
power injection capability, (buses 47, 57, 63, 66 and 77), the differences are
negative with the exception of bus 57. This means that in these buses the DC
OPF approach delivers higher M P IC values than the AC OPF method.
Especially for long term planning, the load and generation uncertainties can
introduce much higher errors than those made using DC power flow. The DC
optimal power flow approach is suitable for long term planning purposes in
densely meshed networks due to the advantage of better convergence, faster
PROBABILISTIC METHODS 51
Relative difference in %
10
−10 .
0 50 100
Bus number
Figure 3.5: Relative difference between AC and DC OPF methods, red line indicates mean
value of difference, × marks the difference for buses with highest MPIC
computation and sufficient accuracy. In practise while using DC power flow

and optimal power flow calculations, the thermal line limits are set to lower
values (typically 90% - 95% of their actual values) in order to account for the
difference with the AC power flow approach.
3.4 Probabilistic methods
Power flow or optimal power flow calculations only capture a snapshot of many
different generation and demand situations. In reality, demand and generation
change constantly. They can vary in two dimensions, time and location. As
not all possible combinations of generation and demand can be calculated,
probabilistic power flow calculations have been introduced in the 1970s [93,94].
The idea behind the probabilistic power flow calculation is the representation
of power injections and power flows using probability density functions.
3.4.1 Gaussian distributed variables
Using the DC power flow approach with Gaussian distributed power injections,
the expected value and standard deviation of branch flows can be calculated
using two matrix multiplications [93]:
P̄f low = P T DF · (I − L0 · ϵN ) · P̄bus = H · P̄bus (3.9a)
P T DF = Bf · B −1 (3.9b)
σf2 low = H 2 · σP2 bus (3.9c)
The mean values of branch flows (P̄f low ) are computed using the mean value
of power injections in each node (P̄bus ) (3.9a). PTDF is the power transfer
distribution function matrix, defining the change in power flow in each line
depending on the change in power injections of each bus (3.9b). The PTDF
matrix is calculated using the susceptance matrix of the system B is and Bf
mapping the branch susceptances to buses. Each row of Bf represents a branch,
whereas the columns represent buses. For a branch connecting buses i and j,
the ith element is the positive branch susceptance, whereas the j th element
is the negative. I is the identity matrix and L0 · ϵN defines the distribution
of excess power at the slack node(s) [93]. ϵN is a unit line vector. L0 is a
column vector with length M . The elements contain values between zero and
one depending on how much they contribute to balance the excess power. The
sum of the elements of L0 is one.
In general, the probability distribution of demand is not Gaussian. It depends
on the time of day and weather conditions [95]. The consumption behaviour
is reflected by the time dependence, whereas the weather conditions determine
the quantity. Additionally, there exists a random component reflecting unusual
consumption behaviour [95]. The injections of renewable energy sources show a
non-Gaussian distribution as well. This means that the above equations cannot
be used to calculate probabilistic power flow. Therefore, other possibilities have
to be found in order to determine the probability distribution of power flows.
3.4.2 Gaussian Component Combination Method
The Gaussian component combination method [96,97] can be used to represent

any probability distribution as a weighted sum of Gaussian distributions (3.10).
∑
L
fY (y) = ωi fN (µi , σi2 ) (3.10)
i=1
These Gaussian distributions have all different mean values and standard
deviations. In (3.10), L is the number of components chosen and fN (µi , σi2 )
the ith Gaussian (Normal) distribution function with expected value µi and
∑L
standard deviation σi2 . ωi is the weight of the ith component with i=1 ωi =1.
Figure 3.6 illustrates the principle of the Gaussian component combination
method. The probability distribution shown belongs to power output of a
wind farm. Although the wind speeds are Weibull distributed, the application
of the wind farm power curve results in a distribution which is far away from a
Weibull distribution. To construct this distribution, 8760 Weibull distributed
random wind speed samples are created and applied to the wind turbine power
output curve (figure 3.7). For the sake of simplicity it is assumed that all wind
turbines experience the same wind speed. The samples are created such that
the capacity factor of the wind farm equals 43% which is usual for offshore
wind farms. Figure 3.6 shows that the wind farm power output is either 0
or 1 pu most of the time. The distribution is reconstructed as a sum of four
Gaussian distributions (L = 4) using the "gmdistribution" function of Matlab.
The Gaussian components of wind power injections can reach into negative
injections or higher injections than 1 pu (Figure3.6). In such cases values
under 0 pu and above 1 pu need to eliminated.
The Gaussian component combination method (GCCM) to calculate power
flows is applied as follows. First, power injections and loads in all buses are
approximated using the GCCM. As such, each component is now Gaussian
distributed so that according probabilistic flows can be calculated (3.9). In this
case, the Gaussian components of each injection or load have to be combined.
The required number of calculations is,
∏
Ninj
Nr = Lj (3.11)
j=1
where Ninj is the number of injections and Lj is the number of Gaussian

components of each injection or load. For instance, if all injections would be
represented with one Gaussian component, only one power flow calculation
has to be performed. In case there are two injections represented with two
components each, the number of necessary calculations is 4.
The probability distribution of power flows (P DFf lows ) can be calculated using
∑
Nr
( )
P DFf lows = ω̂i · P T DF · PNinj µ̂i , σ̂i2 (3.12)
i=1
1,400
1,200
Total distribution
1,000
Number of hours
800
µ = 0.001, σ = 0.005, ω = 0.134 µ = 0.998, σ = 0.005, ω = 0.151

600
µ = 0.104, σ = 0.071, ω = 0.283

400
µ = 0.571, σ = 0.26, ω = 0.433

200
0.
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Power output in p.u.
Figure 3.6: Probability distribution of the power output of a wind farm and its approximation
using GCCM
∏Ninj
The weight of each Gaussian component ω̂i is calculated with ω̂i = j=1 ωj
∑Nr
where the sum of the weight for all components must add to i=1 ω̂i = 1.
In larger grids, with hundreds of buses this can still result in a large number of
power flow calculations. Nevertheless, the number can be limited by reducing
the number of used Gaussian components for the probability density functions.
One method is the pair merging approach with integral square differences
[98–100]. In this method, the integral square difference between the original
combination f (y) and the combination with the reduced number of components
g(y)
∫
Js = (f (y) − g(y))2 dy (3.13)
is calculated for all possible combinations of Gaussian components. The pair

of components i and j which deliver the smallest value of Js are merged to one
new component. The resulting weight of the merged component is
Wind power output in pu 0.8
0.6
0.4
Cut-out speed
Cut-in speed
0.2
0 ..
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Windspeed in m/s
Figure 3.7: Typical power output curve of a wind turbine
ωij = ωi + ωj (3.14)
where ωi and ωj are the weights of components i and j respectively. The mean
value and standard deviation of the combined component are calculated with
1
µij = · (ωi · µi + ωj · µj ) (3.15)
ωi + ωj
and
( )
1 ωi · ωj
2
σij = · ωi · σi2 + ωj · σi2 + · (µi − µj )2 (3.16)
ωi + ωj ωi + ωj
where µi and µj are the mean values and σi2 and σj2 are the standard deviations
of components i and j respectively.
3.4.3 Monte Carlo Simulation
The most popular approach to deal with non-Gaussian probabilities is the

Monte Carlo simulation. The general principle of Monte Carlo simulation
is illustrated in figure 3.8. A large number of data samples for network
injections (load and generation) is created. Based on the created data samples,
deterministic power flow calculations are performed for each sample. Using the
results of all power flow calculations, a probability density function (PDF) for
a given confidence interval can be created. The number of sufficient samples
depends on the number of injections as well as the probability distribution of
samples. For larger systems with hundreds of nodes, the computational burden
can be very high.
.
Create Ns samples
Analyse power flow
of different
results and create
generation and load
PDF
values
Ns power flow
calculations
Figure 3.8: General principle of Monte Carlo simulation
3.4.4 Comparison of Monte Carlo Simulation and GCCM
The comparison between Monte Carlo simulation and the GCCM is discussed,
based on the calculation of the maximum power injection capability. As case
study, the IEEE 118 bus system as illustrated in the previous section is used
(figure 3.4). In this example, power injections and loads are considered to
be uncorrelated. If the injections are treated as uncorrelated, more extreme
combinations between injections and loads are taken into account. This
results in higher variances in branch flows and more distinctive maximum and
minimum flows than in case of correlated injections.
For the case studied, three generators are modelled as wind generators (3.6).
The wind generators are located at buses 10, 57 and 71. The probability
distribution functions of the wind injections are approximated using the four
Gaussian components. To limit the number of calculations, the number of
Gaussian components is reduced to three using the pair merging approach
with integral square differences [98–100]. The probability distribution of loads
is derived from real load profiles obtained from [101]. The load profiles are
set in per unit and applied to all loads of the IEEE 118 bus test system [92].
All load profiles are approximated first with 2 Gaussian components. Except
in six buses, the number of components is reduced to one. This results in
N = 33 · 26 = 1728 optimal power flow calculations. For the comparison, a
Monte Carlo Simulation with 10000 samples of uniformly distributed values is

used.
Figure 3.9 shows the results achieved with the GCCM method and the MCS
for the 5 buses with the highest power injection capability. The mean value
of the M P IC, its standard deviation, the branch most likely to be overloaded
(critical branch, CB) and the probability that the critical branch reaches its
limits (line limit frequency LLF ) are illustrated. With the Gaussian component
combination method a good approximation of the distribution of the maximum
power injection capability can be achieved. There is one difference visible
concerning node 57. The figure shows that the standard deviation with Monte
Carlo Simulation is significantly higher than in the case of GCCM. The reason
therefore is that a wind farm is situated at node 57 (figure 3.4). During the
calculation of the Gaussian components, the parts of the Gaussian distributions
which are lower than 0 pu and higher than 1 pu have been discarded (figure 3.6).
Due to the characteristic of the wind injection, components with mean values
close to 0 pu and 1 pu respectively occur. Due to the error made by discarding
parts of the distribution, the standard deviation becomes smaller in comparison
to the MC simulation. At the other buses situated further from the wind farms,
these effects are not visible as the injected power is distributed over several
paths. The computation time of the maximum power injection capabilities
require 2 hours and 33 minutes with the GCCM in comparison to 12 hours and
51 minutes with the Monte Carlo simulation achieving approximately 5 times
higher computational speed.
In practice, it is not necessary to calculate the M P IC of every single node in
the observed power system. Due to geographic restrictions, already a subset
of investigated nodes can be preselected. Additionally, it is possible to exclude
nodes whose connection capability is not large enough:
∑
Nbr 2
Pmax,j
Pcon,i = (3.17)
j=1
P̄N,max
Pcon,i is the connection capacity of bus i, Nbr is the number of branches

connected to bus i, Pmax,j is the rating of branch j and P̄N,max is the average of
all branch ratings. Obviously, the connection capability is not a strict selection
criterion as the distribution of the maximum power injection capability depends
on the connected loads and generators as well. The connection capability should
be used as indication and for automated calculation procedures where the there
is no user interaction during the selection of candidate nodes, the number of
candidate notes should be chosen higher than actually required.
′′
57
P̄ = 1580, σ = 3, CB: 95, LLF = 99.8%
′
57
P̄ = 1579, σ = 37, CB: 95, LLF = 100.0%
′′
66
P̄ = 1588, σ = 26, CB: 123, LLF = 99.5%
′
66
BUS number
P̄ = 1588, σ = 25, CB: 102, LLF = 100.0%

′′
77
P̄ = 1648, σ = 4, CB: 120, LLF = 100.0%
′
77
P̄ = 1651, σ = 5, CB: 123, LLF = 100.0%
′′
47
P̄ = 1695, σ = 4, CB: 96, LLF = 100.0%
′
47
P̄ = 1696, σ = 7, CB: 96, LLF = 100.0%
′′
63
P̄ = 1697, σ = 6, CB: 102, LLF = 97.1%
′
63
P̄ = 1700, σ = 7, CB: 102, LLF = 100.0%
.
1,450 1,500 1,550 1,600 1,650 1,700 1,750 1,800
MPIC in MW
Figure 3.9: Comparison of GCCM and MC simulation, ′ indicates MC simulation while ′′
indicates the GMMC method. The five buses with highest M P IC are depicted
3.5 Effect of N-1 security
The N-1 approach is widely used in transmission system planning to take

possible outages of equipment in the transmission system into account. The N-
1 criterion states that the power system must still be safe if one major element
in the power system faces an outage. For large power systems, the calculation
of all N-1 cases requires large computation time as the outage of each element
is investigated separately. If there are N elements in the system (e.g. lines,
generators,...), N power flow (or optimal power flow) calculations have to be
performed. In case probabilistic methods are used, the number of calculations
would be N · Ns where Ns the number of samples used, clearly a very large
number.
In order to limit the computational effort, the set of the investigated elements
can be reduced. One possibility is based on the expertise of the system planner
who is able to point out the most critical elements in his system.
To identify the set of most critical elements in a generalized way, line overload
distribution factors (LODF) can be used [102]. The LODFs indicate the change
EFFECT OF N-1 SECURITY 59
in power flow in a set of monitored lines M in case of outage of a defined set

of lines O.
If monitored and outaged lines are investigated one by one, a matrix γ can be
built, representing the effect of outage of each branch on all remaining branches
in the system:
 
0 LODF1,2 ... LODF1,N
br
 LODF2,1 0 ... LODF2,N 
γ= 
br
(3.18)
 ..
.
..
.
..
.
..
.

LODFN ... LODFN 0
br ,1 br ,Nbr −1
The elements of γ are,
( 0 −1
)
0
γi,j = LODFi,j = P T DFi,j I − P T DFj,j (3.19a)
γi,i = 0 (3.19b)
where i are the affected branches (monitored branches), j branches with outage
and I the identity matrix. The zero values in the main diagonal are chosen
arbitrarily, as the effect of outage of a branch on itself is unidentified. P T DF 0
is the pre-contingency PTDF matrix [102].
The effect of a line outage on remaining lines depends on the initial power flow
situation. For instance, if the power flow on a tripped line is not high, the
power can be distributed amongst different paths without causing overload. In
case of a large power flow, overload situations on other branches might occur.
Using the γ-matrix after each optimal power flow calculation, a set of lines
can be determined which cause overload on other lines in case of outage. This
way, the N-1 calculation can be reduced only to the lines expected to cause
problems.
While calculating the maximum power injection capability, it is not necessary
to use the whole set of lines which cause an overload. The maximum power
injection capability is calculated using the minimum value obtained in the N-1
calculation as all other injection capabilities would result in an overload. As
such, it is sufficient to use only the lines causing the most critical situations
in case of outage. In general, these are the lines with the highest value in the
γ-matrix. This way, it is possible to further reduce the number of calculations
to a smaller set while investigating in N-1 security.
The calculation procedure to take into account the N-1 security criterion in the
developed methodology is depicted in figure 3.10. First, the OPF calculation
is performed to calculate the maximum power injection capability in the N

state for one combination of Gaussian components (or for one sample of the
Monte Carlo simulation). The result of the OPF calculation delivers the branch
flows in the N state. Using the branch flows in the N state and the γ-matrix,
potential overloads are determined. The branches are ranked after the severity
of overloads they are cause. Based on the ranking, a sub-set of lines causing
the highest overloads is chosen. Sequentially, each branch in this sub-set is
deactivated and the maximum power injection capability in each N-1 state is
determined. The minimum value of power injection capabilities among each
N-1 case is used as the final maximum power injection capability of the sample
used. This procedure has to be repeated for each combination of Gaussian
components or each sample of the Monte Carlo simulation.
.
Run OPF calculation
Calculate power flow after outage with γ - matrix
Determine lines causing overload in case of outage
Rank lines causing overload after increase in power

flow
Select sub-set of lines causing overload
Deactivate each line in subset, run new OPF,

calculate and save M P IC
Select solution with lowest M P IC
Figure 3.10: Line selection procedure for N-1 criterion
Figure 3.11 illustrates the change in the maximum power injection capability
if the N-1 security criterion is considered. The maximum power injection
capability of investigated nodes decreases significantly. The decrease in M P IC
is different for each node considered (figure 3.11). The ranking of the "strongest"
buses changes. Also the most critical branches which reach their limits most
frequently are different in the N and N-1 case. As such, the neglection of
security criteria can lead to wrong assumptions in the identification of strong
grid nodes. These strong nodes are the basis for the optimization process of
future lines and therefore have high importance.
EFFECT OF POWER FLOW CONTROLLING DEVICES 61
′′
57
P̄ = 1579, σ = 3, CB: 95, LLF = 99.8%
′
57
P̄ = 1397, σ = 1, CB: 87, LLF = 100.0%
′′
66
P̄ = 1588, σ = 26, CB: 123, LLF = 99.5%
′
66
BUS number
P̄ = 1180, σ = 18, CB: 123, LLF = 99.6%

′′
77
P̄ = 1648, σ = 4, CB: 120, LLF = 100.0%
′
77
P̄ = 1359, σ = 17, CB: 120, LLF = 100.0%
′′
47
P̄ = 1695, σ = 4, CB: 96, LLF = 100.0%
′
47
P̄ = 1449, σ = 13, CB: 96, LLF = 100.0%
′′
63
P̄ = 1697, σ = 6, CB: 102, LLF = 97.1%
′
63
P̄ = 1492, σ = 7, CB: 100, LLF = 100.0%
. .
MPIC in GW
Figure 3.11: Comparison of M P IC between N and N-1 case on the modified IEEE 118bus
network, ′ indicates N-1 case and ′′ indicates the base case
3.6 Effect of power flow controlling devices
The maximum power injection capability depends on the temporal and spatial
distribution of generation and demand as well as the network characteristics.
Eventually, the power flows are distributed according to the injection pattern
and the impedances of network elements. As their name states, power flow
controlling devices can change the power flow in the lines they are installed in
but also influences the flows in neighbouring lines. This controllability can be
used to increase the maximum power injection capability in case such devices
are already installed in the grid. This section investigates the effect of power
flow controlling devices. Two common types of power flow controlling devices,
namely phase shifting transformers (PSTs) and high voltage direct current
(HVDC) links are used.
3.6.1 PST devices
Phase shifting transformers induce a voltage in quadrature of the line voltage

in order to change the voltage magnitude and phase angle. The power flow
through a line with a PST can be controlled [91]. Using series compensation
devices, such as thyristor controlled series compensation (TCSC) or static
synchronous series compensator (SSSC) performances similar to PSTs can be
achieved [103].
As stated in [104–106], during power flow calculation, a transmission line i, j
equipped with a PST can be modelled using an additional impedance having
two additional injections with opposite signs on both sides (figure 3.12). The
additional power injections ∆Peq ij
(ϕ) and −∆Peq ij
(ϕ) create a change in the
power flow through line i, j caused by the phase angle change of the PST
situated at line i, j. Xij is the reactance of the line i, j and Xpst is the reactance
of the phase shifting transformer respectively. Appropriate values for Xpst can
be found in [107, 108].
ij
∆Peq (ϕ) −∆Peq
ij
(ϕ)
. Xpst Xij
i k j
Figure 3.12: Modelling of PSTs with additional equivalent power injections
In the DC OPF calculation, the additional injections ∆Peq ij

(ϕ) and −∆Peq
ij
(ϕ)
can simply be modelled using two additional generators in the system,
connected to nodes i and a new created node k (figure 3.12). This way the
optimal values ∆Peq ij
(ϕ) and −∆Peq
ij
(ϕ) can be found by the OPF algorithm,
maximizing injection capabilities of grid nodes and respecting power flow
limits of each transmission line in the system by changing the power flow
on line i, j . In the OPF formulation, the sum of injections from both
additional generators has to be zero being an additional constraint to the
optimization. The generation costs of these additional generators is zero1 .
Therefore, the optimization solver prefers the control function of the PST above
other generators. Obviously, the additional injections ∆Peq ij
(ϕ) and −∆Peq
ij
(ϕ)
have to be limited in order to account for the maximum and minimum phase
angles of the installed PSTs. The maximum and minimum equivalent injection
1 Costs can be assigned to the additional generators, if additional costs, such as
transmission losses of the PST, have to be considered.

EFFECT OF POWER FLOW CONTROLLING DEVICES 63
max,ij min,ij
Peq and Peq can be calculated using
max,ij
ϕmax
pst
∆Peq = (3.20a)
Xpst
min,ij
ϕmin
pst
∆Peq = (3.20b)
Xpst
where Xpst is the reactance of the phase shifting transformer and ϕmax
pst and
min
ϕpst are the maximum and minimum phase angles of the PST respectively.
For the results (figure 3.13), three PSTs are added to the system, two PSTs
on branches 96 and 97, connecting buses 47 and 64, one PST on branch 102
connecting bus 63 with bus 66. These branches are the critical branches
obtained in the previous calculations (figure 3.9). For the maximum phase angle
shift of the transformers, ± 30◦ is used. The power system can be operated
closer to its limits when power flow controlling devices are used. The mean
value of the maximum power injection capability is in all cases higher than in
the case without PSTs. Another positive effect is observed in bus 47 where the
line limit frequency, indicating how frequent lines are operating at their limit,
of the critical branch decreases.
3.6.2 HVDC connections
By changing the power set points of HVDC converters, the power flow through
an HVDC link can be controlled. This controllability can be used to increase
the maximum power injection capability of selected grid nodes. Similar to PSTs,
HVDC links can be included in DC optimal power flow calculations [109]. In
this case, a DC link is represented by two generators which are connected at the
buses where the DC link is connected. A new optimization constraint has to be
included enforcing opposite signs of injected power (figure 3.14). A power flow
through the new branches equals the optimal power flow through the HVDC
link. If HVDC transmission losses must be taken into account, the constraint
can be rewritten as Pg = −Pg1 + fl (Pg ), where fl (Pg ) represents the HVDC
transmission losses as a function of transmitted power through the link. The
costs of the additional generators can be set to a value representing the costs
of using the HVDC link.
In figure 3.15, the effect of HVDC links on the maximum power injection
capability is shown. The same three lines as in the case with phase shifting
transformers have been replaced by HVDC links. The costs of the additional
′′
57
P̄ = 1579, σ = 3, CB: 95, LLF = 99.8%
′
57
P̄ = 1675, σ = 2, CB: 179, LLF = 100.0%
′′
66
P̄ = 1588, σ = 26, CB: 123, LLF = 99.5%
′
66
BUS number
P̄ = 1674, σ = 23, CB: 105, LLF = 100.0%

′′
77
P̄ = 1648, σ = 4, CB: 120, LLF = 100.0%
′
77
P̄ = 1765, σ = 3, CB: 120, LLF = 100.0%
′′
47
P̄ = 1695, σ = 4, CB: 96, LLF = 100.0%
′
47
P̄ = 1869, σ = 4, CB: 96, LLF = 14.5%
′′
63
P̄ = 1697, σ = 6, CB: 102, LLF = 97.1%
′
63
P̄ = 1841, σ = 9, CB: 100, LLF = 100.0%
.
1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000 2,100
MPIC in MW
Figure 3.13: Effect of existing PSTs on the M P IC, ′′ indicates the base case and ′ indicates
case with PSTs
.
=
=
Pg = −Pg1
Figure 3.14: Modeling of HVDC connections in the optimal power flow calculation
generators simulating the HVDC link have been set to zero to allow maximum
flexibility in the use of the links. Figure 3.15 depicts that the additional
controllability of HVDC links increases the maximum power injection capability
of grid nodes. As the set points of HVDC converters is determined by the OPF
with the objective of maximizing injections in the investigated nodes, the power
flow is distributed such that higher injections become feasible.
CONCLUSIONS 65
′′
57
P̄ = 1579, σ = 3, CB: 95, LLF = 99.8%
′
57
P̄ = 1732, σ = 93, CB: 95, LLF = 96.8%
′′
66
P̄ = 1588, σ = 26, CB: 123, LLF = 99.5%
′
66
BUS number
P̄ = 1681, σ = 18, CB: 100, LLF = 100.0%

′′
77
P̄ = 1648, σ = 4, CB: 120, LLF = 100.0%
′
77
P̄ = 1648, σ = 2, CB: 120, LLF = 100.0%
′′
47
P̄ = 1695, σ = 4, CB: 96, LLF = 100.0%
′
47
P̄ = 1738, σ = 4, CB: 104, LLF = 1.4%
′′
63
P̄ = 1697, σ = 6, CB: 102, LLF = 97.1%
′
63
P̄ = 1738, σ = 4, CB: 94, LLF = 56.9%
.
1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 1,900 2,000
MPIC in MW
Figure 3.15: Effect of existing HVDC lines on the maximum power injection capability, ′′
indicates the base case and ′ indicates case with HVDC lines
3.7 Conclusions
In this chapter a methodology is discussed, combining different calculation and

modelling techniques in a different way to quantify maximum power injection
capabilities. The maximum power injection capabilities indicate how much
power in a certain node can be injected without causing overload situations in
the investigated network. These capabilities are used as input parameters for
the optimization of transmission system investments which is elaborated in the
following chapters. The use of maximum power injection capabilities allows an
abstraction from the existing grid, in order to reduce optimization and state
variables in the further optimization process.
The methodology allows TSOs to assess strong connection points in their grid
which can serve to connect power plants or interconnectors. Besides TSOs,
this methodology can also be used by power generators in order to assess the
sizing of their investments. As the calculation of the maximum power injection
capability uses cost information of existing generators, power generation
companies can use this methodology to estimate their future revenues and
conduct a cost benefit analysis for their investments in case they have sufficient
information about their competitors.
The maximum power injection capabilities depend on the temporal and spatial
distribution of generation and demand, as well as network characteristics. As
such, these capabilities have to be calculated in a probabilistic way. This
chapter has provided an application of the Gaussian component combination
method to approximate probability distribution functions. Using the Gaussian
component combination method, savings in computation time can be achieved
without compromising accuracy.
Security constraints limit the power injection capability in certain nodes
setting limits on new transmission system investments. The methodology
includes a procedure to efficiently assess N-1 security during the determination
of maximum power injection capabilities. The assessment shows that the
consideration of the N-1 security constraint changes the ranking of grid nodes
in terms of injection capability. A node which is the strongest one in the N
case does not necessarily have to be the strongest one in the N-1 case. The
investigated nodes serve as future connection points for large scale transmission
system investments and possibly a future overlay grid. As such, the candidate
nodes have to be chosen very carefully as the topology of the future transmission
grid depends on the candidate nodes.
This chapter further shows that power flow controlling devices help to use the
existing grid better allowing higher injections into the grid. With increased
flexibility in the transmission grid, the maximum power injection capability
increases as well, as the transmission lines can be utilized more efficiently. By
increasing flexibility connection of larger power plants or links with higher
power ratings might become feasible increasing the overall social benefits as
larger single power units or links are economically more feasible.
Chapter 4
Optimization of Topology,
Technology and Routing
Improvement makes strait roads, but the crooked roads without improvement,
are roads of genius. - William Blake
4.1 Introduction
The properties of the optimization variables and constraints make the

transmission system investment optimization a non-convex, non-linear and a
mixed-integer optimization problem. Such problems are difficult to solve by
existing optimization solvers.
In the literature, a large number of transmission expansion optimization
methodologies exist considering different levels of detail. With the level of
detail, also the level of complexity varies. Detail and complexity have a direct
influence on the computational efficiency.
This chapter is based on [22] and illustrates an optimization methodology
to determine the economically most feasible transmission topology, route,
technology and power ratings for system expansion. The remainder of this
chapter is outlined as follows. The optimization methodology is described in
general. The mixed integer linear program and the shortest path calculation are
illustrated which are used iteratively in the developed algorithm. Further, the
interface between both building blocks is described. The chapter concludes
67
68 OPTIMIZATION OF TOPOLOGY, TECHNOLOGY AND ROUTING
with illustrative examples demonstrating the capabilities of the developed

methodology.
4.2 Structure of the optimization methodology
As elaborated in section 2.6, the optimization methodology aims to find the

best transmission topology, transmission technology and transmission route for
a given interconnection capacity using the maximum power injection capability
of the underlying grid. The optimal topology (starting and terminating
substations of new links) and power ratings are determined in such a way that
investment costs of new links are minimized. The transmission route and the
technology selection of a certain link is easy to determine if the rated power and
the topology are known. The difficulty is that the used costs for the topology
and rating optimization depend on the route and technology selection which in
turn is a result on the selected topology and rating.
One way of solving this optimization problem is to determine the best
technology and route for each possible transmission path and power rating.
If all the optima per path and power rating are known, the global optimal
topology enabling the desired interconnection power can be determined using
linear integer programming (brute force approach). It is a time intensive
prospect to calculate the optimal route, technology and cabling option for
every possible power rating and every possible path. The method proposed in
this chapter separates the coupled problem into two dependent sub-problems:
selection of topology and rating of an electrical network, and discovery of a
least cost path which combines the factors of routing, technology and cabling
(overhead lines versus underground cabling). The two problems are solved
iteratively in a separate way. Topology and rating are first optimized using
mixed-integer linear programming (MILP), but based only on fixed average
costs per branch. Only the branches chosen in the first stage for a given
iteration are optimally routed using shortest path algorithms. Sequentially,
the average costs used in the first stage are updated based on the results of the
optimal routing algorithm for the next iteration. This way, the computation
time can be decreased significantly. The case study in Section 4.6 shows that
global optimal solutions are still approached.
Figure 4.1 depicts the proposed optimization methodology. To solve the
optimization problem, the maximum power injection capabilities of a selected
set of buses have to be provided as input parameter. Additionally, the change
in maximum power injection capabilities due to injections and absorptions in
STRUCTURE OF THE OPTIMIZATION METHODOLOGY 69
different candidate nodes are needed. The calculation procedure of these input
parameters has been described in chapter 3.
Initially, average costs for each possible branch are determined, which are used
as input for the MILP optimization. To save computation time, these costs are
determined using the optimal routing algorithm with a low spatial resolution.
The average costs have the dimension e/M W . A detailed explanation of the
cost calculation is given in section 4.4.
In the first step, the transmission system topology is optimized using MILP. In
this step the rating of each branch is optimized, using the average costs and the
distance between buses. The objective function and constraints of the MILP
optimization are described in section 4.3.
In the second step, the optimal routing, technology and cabling option of each
selected path is determined. Spatial information of the investigated area is
required. Based on this information, different sub-areas with different spatial
weights for each technology and cabling option are defined. These spatial
weights are translated into costs to be used by the optimal routing algorithm.
Two optimal routing algorithms are described and compared in section 4.5. The
output of the optimal routing algorithm delivers minimum costs, optimal route,
transmission technology and cabling option for each selected transmission path
and power rating.
In the third step, the average costs of selected paths are updated using the
output of the optimal routing algorithm. The obtained topology is saved and
the routine is repeated until the objective function value of the MILP algorithm
and the optimal routing algorithm converge or a certain maximum number
of iterations is reached. After the iterative optimization, an N-1 analysis is
performed and additional necessary circuit additions are proposed.
The reason for choosing this specific iterative structure rather than including
technology selection, transmission routing and security constraints in the MILP
optimization is to avoid a complex and non-linear integer problem (MINLP)
formulation. Commercial and non-commercial solvers for this type of problems
often have problems in terms of convergence and computation time, especially
for large scale problems with thousands of variables. The iterative structure of
the proposed methodology further allows to obtain a set of feasible solutions
instead of one particular solution in the case that the entire problem is solved
in one optimization step.
The methodology is implemented in MATLAB. The commercial CPLEX and
the open source SCIP solvers are used to solve the MILP problem both
delivering different computational efficiency in depending on the size of the
MILP problem [110–113]. For smaller scale problems the SCIP solver proves
to be more efficient whereas for large scale problems as shown in Chapter 6 the
CPLEX solver delivers better efficiency and convergence.
Calculate average costs using optimal

routing algorithm with low resolution
. 1.) Optimize topology with MILP algorithm

using average costs e/(M W · km)
3.) Update
average costs of Optimal rating of each branch
selected paths 2.) Find shortest route, best technology and
best cabling of selected paths
NO
Convergence or Minimum costs of each selected path
iteration limit? Save result
YES
4.) Perform N-1 analysis, reinforce
necessary paths and rank solutions
Figure 4.1: Iterative optimization of transmission topology, technology, cabling and routing
4.3 MILP optimization of Topology and Rating
The goal of the MILP optimization is to find the rating of branches in a given set
of possible branches which minimize the total investment costs while enabling
the desired interconnection P inter between two zones. Possible power ratings
are restricted to discrete values given by the 1 × Nk vector
k = [k1 , k2 , . . . , kNk ] (4.1)
where Nk is the number of possible ratings allowed. All possible branches

between candidate nodes are considered in the optimization. This means, if
there are Nn candidate nodes, Nb = Nn !/(2 · (Nn − 2)!) possible branches
exist to invest in.
The interconnector can be comprised of multiple tie-lines and branches, and
the final optimal configuration may require flows in different directions. Each
MILP OPTIMIZATION OF TOPOLOGY AND RATING 71
branch may affect maximum possible injections of other nodes in a manner

unsymmetrical with direction. To account for asymmetry and flow cancellation,
two decision matrices of size Nb × Nk are used in the formulation to indicate
a given topology and capacity design. This results in a search space consisting
of Ns = 2 · Nb · Nk variables. The definition for positive paths is
{
+ ui,j = 1 if branch i with rating j selected
U = (4.2)
0 otherwise
The definition of negative paths (U − ) is similar. Each branch can have at most
one capacity specified and a path cannot be selected to be both forward and
backward.
∑
Nk
−
+
Uij + Uij =1∀i (4.3)
j
The actual selected capacities are a Nb × 1 vector
( )
K = U+ − U− · k (4.4)
where the sign of K indicates intended direction of flow to achieve the desired
interconnection capability P inter .
Branches situated inside one zone do not contribute directly to the desired
interconnection capability. They are rather local reinforcements necessary to
avoid overload situations in case the interconnectors are built. Therefore, tie-
lines are marked by the Nb × 1 indicator vector l,
{
1 if branch i is a tie line
l= (4.5)
0 otherwise
Using the above definitions, the topology optimization problem is formulated

as the minimization of a total capacity cost Ccap while meeting or exceeding
the desired interconnection power and not exceeding maximum injection
capabilities of candidate nodes.
( ) ( )
min
+ −
Ccap = U + + U − : ⃗1 ⊗ k · C̃ : L (4.6)
∀ U ,U
∈ B Nb ×Nk
∑∑( )
+ −
= Uij + Uij · Kij · C̃ij Lij
i j
s.t.
( )
P inter ≤ U+ + U− : l ⊗ k (4.7)
( + −
)
PM P IC ≥ ∆tot
M P IC · U + U ·k (4.8)
K, ∀ i ∈ [1, Nb ] ≥ Ki (4.9)
C̃ij and Lij denote an average cost and length respectively for every possible
branch i and rating j, PM P IC is a column vector with the nodal maximum
power injection and absorption capability and ∆M P IC a matrix defining the
change in maximum power injection and absorption capabilities due to flows on
selected candidate branches. K is the maximum allowable capacity of a single
line dictated by reliability concerns. This value indicates the power rating of
the strongest link within a transmission grid allowed to face an outage and is
defined by the TSO according to its specific security constraints. As indicated
in the expansion (4.6), the “:” operator in (4.6) and (4.7) is the sum over
an element-wise product or Frobenius product, while “ · ” denotes a regular
matrix multiplication or inner product and ⊗ the outer product.
Constraint (4.7) states that the sum of power ratings of interconnecting
branches has to be more than or equal to the total interconnection power P inter .
Constraint (4.8) describes Kirchhoff’s current law and states that the maximum
power injection capability of connected nodes may not be exceeded. PM P IC
is a vector containing maximum power injection and absorption capabilities of
candidate buses. If there is a power injection or withdrawal in one node, the
maximum power injection capabilities of other nodes change, which is expressed
by
 
∆1,1,1 ∆1,2,1 ... ∆1,Nb ,1 ... ∆1,Nb ,Nk
 ∆2,1,1 ∆2,2,1 ... ∆2,Nb ,1 ... ∆2,Nb ,Nk

 
tot
∆M P IC = . . . . . . (4.10)
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
∆Nn ,1,1 ∆Nn ,2,1 ... ∆Nn ,Nb ,1 ... ∆Nn ,Nb ,Nk
CALCULATION AND UPDATE OF AVERAGE COSTS 73
i,i i,a a,i a,a

∆tot
M P IC is constructed using the matrices ∆M P IC , ∆M P IC ,∆M P IC and ∆M P IC
described in section 3.2. The first index indicates the affected node, the second
the number of the branch affecting the maximum power injection capability
and the third the possible power rating of the branch.
Constraint (4.9) states that the power rating of a selected branch i must
not exceed a defined maximum rating K, as determined by the technology
associated with that branch in the current iteration.
4.4 Calculation and update of average costs
The average transmission system costs in e/M W are inversely proportional to

the rating of the transmission system. This is due to the fact that installation
costs of equipment are independent of the power rating, once the voltage level,
the technology and the location of the installation are defined. Additionally,
investment costs also have a fixed part which is independent of the power
rating as parts of the production and transportation costs are independent of
the power rating.
A given technology achieves a desired link capacity by using an integer number
of lines. This introduces a discontinuity in the dependence of cost on link
capacities (figure 4.2a). In case different technologies and cabling options for
new investments are considered, multiple discontinuities can be found near a
given link capacity value. In fact, either technology is cheapest in the neigh-
bourhood of its maximal capacity per circuit (figure 4.2a). A local minimum
in the MILP optimization always comes next to such discontinuities, and this
complicates the optimization of the topology. Figure 4.2a demonstrates that
there can be multiple break-even values to guide a choice of technology 1 or 2.
Figure 4.2b is based on the equipment and installation costs used for the case
study (section 4.6). The figure shows that for different power ratings of a certain
inter-connector, different technologies might provide the cheapest solution. As
such, the technology selection has to be performed for each possible power
rating separately, rather than based on a predefined break-even power rating.
The costs per used power of transmission equipment for each possible power
rating have to be provided. In order to save computation time, the costs for
each possible path at the maximum power rating of one system are calculated
to provide cost information in the first iteration. The calculation is performed
for four different possibilities: AC underground cables (AC UGC), AC overhead
lines (AC OHL), DC underground cables (DC UGC) and DC overhead lines
(DC OHL), using the optimal routing algorithm with a low spatial resolution.
In the same way, the costs at the maximum power rating of a single path, K
e/M W . .
Technology 1
. .
Technology 2
. Cheapest. option
MW
Pmax,1 2 · Pmax,1 3 · Pmax,1
. Pmax,2 2 · Pmax,2
(a) Average transmission system costs as a function of
the power rating fro two different technologies.
3
Total Costs in M e/ MW
0.
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Power rating in MW
(b) Costs per MW for a possible branch of the case study
depicted in figure 4.7. The cheapest technology option
for each power range is indicated. Crosses indicate that
HVDC technology is preferred, diamonds indicate that HVAC
technology is preferred.
Figure 4.2: Average transmission system costs in e/ MW as a function of rated power in

MW.
(e.g. on one tower of overhead transmission lines) are calculated. The costs
at power ratings other than the aforementioned ratings are obtained using a
linear approximation of the calculated costs (figure 4.3a).
OPTIMAL ROUTING FORMULATION AND SOLUTION FROM COST GRAPH 75
After each iteration, the costs of selected paths and power ratings are updated
using the costs calculated with the optimal routing algorithm with desired
spatial resolution. The costs at all other power ratings are recalculated using
linear interpolation and extrapolation of the updated costs (figure 4.3b). In
case the obtained average costs after the second iteration are lower than the
initially calculated ones, the MILP algorithm chooses the same paths and power
ratings again. The optimization algorithm has found a local minimum. As
there is no guarantee that the local minimum is a global one, penalty functions
are applied while updating the average costs. Therefore, if the costs after the
route optimization are lower than the assumed average costs, the average costs
of not selected branches are decreased as well. In contrary, if the costs after
route optimization are higher, the costs for the selected branch are increased
for all power ratings. This way, new branches and power ratings become more
attractive in the following iterations and bigger parts of the search space are
analysed, increasing the chance of finding the global optimal solution.
4.5 Optimal Routing Formulation and Solution

From Cost Graph
The route and transmission technology are interdependent. Additionally, the

installation costs for different technologies depend on the type of soil, land
acquisition costs and other factors. It is therefore important to optimize
the cabling option (OHL vs. UGC), technology (HVAC vs. HVDC) and the
transmission route at the same time.
The investment and installation costs for transmission equipment depend on
spatial properties of the area of focus. In the developed algorithm, a map of
the considered installation area containing all candidate nodes is discretized
to a grid of spatial points pi = [xi , yi ] of size Nx × Ny (figure 4.4). The
number of chosen nodes and their horizontal and vertical position depend on
the desired spatial resolution and the size of the area. All points pi = [xi , yi ]
are distributed at equal distance. The mesh size for discretization is defined
by the user and kept constant during the optimization process for the sake
of simplicity. If higher spatial resolutions are needed to investigate a specific
area or connection, a different type of map would be needed, requiring the
intervention of the user anyhow.
To be able to optimize the technology together with the cabling option, the
four technologies of AC OHL, AC UGC, DC OHL and DC UGC must also be
represented, as well as the effect of creating hybrid options such as AC with DC
and OHL with UGC. Therefore, the optimal routing and technology problem
e/M W
MW
Pmax,AC U GC Pmax,AC OHL Pmax
Pmax,DC U GC
Pmax,DC OHL
.
(a) Calculation of average costs for initial MILP
e/M W
MW
Pmax,AC U GC Pmax,AC OHL Pmax
Pmax,DC U GC
Pmax,DC OHL
.
(b) Update of average costs after each iteration.
Figure 4.3: Calculation of initial and updated average costs for the MILP optimization.
Crosses indicate costs calculated by the optimal routing algorithm in the first iteration.
Squares indicate costs calculated by the optimal routing algorithm in further iterations. Dots
indicate extrapolated costs.
x1 /y1 Spatial map x1 /y1 Discretized map

.
Area 1 Area 2
Figure 4.4: Creation of a weighted directed graph by discretizing a spatial map
is formulated around a weighted graph G = (V, E) having four technology

layers and weighted edges signifying costs. For each technology option a
separate discretization is performed. For every spatial point p, there are
four associated vertices V representing possible technologies (figure 4.5). A
full set of edges E between vertices associated with adjacent spatial points
correspond to cables or lines of a given technology. There are also edges
between the vertices associated with different technologies at the same spatial
point p that correspond to mechanical or electrical conversions necessary to
join dissimilar technologies. This means that for a graph with Nx · Ny nodes,
(10 · Nx · Ny − 3 · (Nx + Ny ) + 2) edges exist 1 .
The graph cost function W (pi , Ej ) can take a different positive value for every
edge j and represents the cost associated with progressing spatially or switching
between technologies:
( )
W (pi , Ej ) = cinv (pi , Ej ) + cinst (Ej ) · w(pi ) d(Ej ) + wswitch (Ej ) (4.11)
where cinv (pi , Ej ) and cinst (pi , Ej ) correspond to both location and technology
dependent investment and installation costs, respectively. w(pi ) is a spatial
weighting factor to take the change of installation costs in different areas into
account. d(Ej ) is the spatial distance associated with the edge, and wswitch (Ej )
is a technology conversion cost. The cost factors also depend on the optimal
capacity K determined by the other sub-problem, but is omitted as the quantity
is fixed for a given iteration.
In (4.11), cinv (pi , Ej ) and cinst (E j ) are given in e/km for a defined reference
area. The spatial weight w(pi ) defines the relative difference of installation
costs in a certain area compared to the reference. In case of offshore cabling, a
different cinv (pi , Ej ) is used to take price differences between on- and offshore
cables into account. For HVAC onshore applications, three single phase cables
1 The total number of edges consist of [2 · ((N − 1) · (N − 1)] edges connected nodes at
x y
the borders of the map, [(Nx − 1) · Ny + (Ny − 1) · Nx ] for edges connecting the remaining
nodes and [6 · Nx · Ny ] nodes for the edges connecting the 4 technology layers.
x1 /y1 Map - AC OHL x1 /y1 Map - DC OHL

.
x1 /y1 Map - AC UGC x1 /y1 Map - DC UGC
(a) Illustration of the weighted graphs for the 4 technologies, different

colors indicate different weights
Map - AC OHL Map - DC OHL

x1 /y1 x1 /y1
.
=
=
=
x1 /y1 = x1 /y1
Map - AC UGC Map - DC UGC
(b) Connection of the four weighted graphs at each edge to
enable the technology switch
Figure 4.5: Creation of a weighted directed graph containing four technologies as input for
the shortest path algorithm
per circuit are used. On the other hand, three phase cables are used for
HVAC offshore applications, as the installation becomes easier. This results
in a different number of cables for the same power rating of the link, reflected
in the investment costs. For HVDC cables, the number of offshore and onshore
cables can be the same. Nevertheless, a cost difference between on- and offshore
HVDC cables has to be taken into account, as the armouring of both cables
are different. In the same manner, different prices are used for on- and offshore
HVDC converters to take the significant offshore platform costs into account.
In case of overhead lines, it is assumed that 2 systems can be installed on

one transmission tower both for AC and DC overhead lines such that the cost
increase from one system to two systems does not result in doubled costs.
When there is a switch in transmission technology, additional costs occur. The
weighting factor wswitch (Ej ) is assigned to each edge of the graph to represent
such costs in the weighted graph. Figure 4.5 shows how the technology switch
is realized. The four technology maps (figure 4.5a) are connected at each
vertex xi /yi . In case of a switch from AC to DC or DC to AC, the edge
is weighted with the cost of an HVDC converter. In case of a switch within
the same technology to a different cabling option, the weight is determined
using the necessary number of cable systems and conductors per cable system
(figure 4.5b). The parameter wswitch can be updated by the grid planner in
order to adjust the additional costs of technology switch for operational issues
and additional necessary equipment for protection. If there is no switch in
technology or cabling option, wiswitch is zero.
To calculate the investment costs for the four transmission options, the number
of conductors and their cross sections for a given power rating have to be known.
The minimum number of conductors and their cross section are calculated using
a database with available cable cross sections and their according rating. The
necessary number of overhead lines and cables are determined using the rated
power of the transmission path delivered by the MILP algorithm and the rated
voltage of the link. In the developed algorithm, the available voltage levels for
each technology can be defined by the user as input. The defined voltage level is
considered to be fixed. In case multiple voltage levels for different transmission
technologies are used, the number of technology maps can be increased. In
such cases following additional costs have to be included while using wiswitch
between technology layers.
• Transformer cost for voltage level changes between AC and AC, with
additional costs for transition from OHL to cables.
• HVDC converter station costs for voltage level changes between AC and
DC, with additional costs for transition from OHL to cables.
• DC-DC converter station costs for voltage level changes between DC and
DC, with additional costs for transition from OHL to cables.
High voltage AC UGC have a high capacitance resulting in high charging

currents. This imposes a maximum distance on a cable without compensation.
It is therefore assumed that the cable has to be compensated after each cable
section of the length dac−ugc , such that the active and reactive current in the
cable are the same.
√
3IN
dac,ugc = √ (4.12)
2 · ω · C · UN
IN is the rated current of one conductor, C the capacitance of the conductor

per km and UN the rated voltage of the conductor. Using the charging current,
the rating and cost of the necessary compensation equipment is determined
and added to the investment costs of AC cables.
Offshore cables can only be compensated at both ends as intermediate
offshore compensation stations are too expensive. This means, that AC UGC
transmission paths having a longer total offshore cable length than dac−ugc
must pass through an onshore area for the compensation station. Therefore, a
distinction between on- and offshore edges of the weighted AC UGC graph is
included in the shortest path algorithm. Every time an edge located offshore is
chosen, the offshore length of the selected path is compared to the maximum
AC offshore length dac,ugc . If the maximum offshore length of one path is
reached, the weights of the next candidate offshore AC edges are multiplied by
a large number, so that they are not chosen by the algorithm. After a switch
from offshore AC to onshore AC or to HVDC technology, the offshore length of
the path is set to zero again to enable further possible offshore segments within
the same path.
Including the above mentioned costs and restrictions into a weighted graph,
the shortest distance between starting and termination point of a path can be
determined using shortest path algorithms. If the weights assigned to the edges
of the graph are costs per km of transmission line, the shortest path algorithm
delivers the minimum transmission system cost between two vertices.
∑
min Cequip = W (E) (4.13)
S
E ∈S
As all four technology layers are interconnected, the shortest path algorithm
delivers the minimum transmission system cost where S is a sequence of edges
corresponding to the lowest cost or “shortest” path. Two different shortest path
algorithms are implemented in the developed methodology, the deterministic
shortest algorithm of Dijkstra and the heuristic A* algorithm.
4.5.1 Dijkstra’s shortest path algorithm
The Dijkstra algorithm is an iterative algorithm which determines the shortest

path between a starting point X and an end point Y in a weighted graph [114].
The algorithm divides all nodes of the weighted graph in three sets which are
updated in each iteration.
• Set A contains all nodes from which the minimum path to the starting
point X is known.
• Set B contains all nodes which to added to set A in the coming iteration
step, being all nodes connected with at least one edge to a node of set A.
• Set C contains all remaining nodes.
All edges of the weighted graph are divided in three sets as well.
• Set I contains all edges which occur in the minimal paths from to the
starting point X to the nodes in set A.
• Set II contains all edges which could be added to set I in the coming
iteration step. Only one branch of this set is chosen to be added to set I
• Set III contains all remaining branches.
At the start of the algorithm, all nodes and edges are put in set C and set III
respectively. The algorithm assumes an infinite distance between all nodes in
the start. Then the starting node X is transferred into set A and deleted from
set C. Iteratively the following two steps are applied until the shortest path is
found (until the end point Y is reached).
• Step 1: All branches connecting the node currently moved into set A with
the nodes in sets B and C are investigated. If a branch b delivers a longer
path between its corresponding node in set B and the starting point, it is
rejected and put in set III. If the branch b connects a node in set C and
delivers a shorter path, the branch is put in set II and the corresponding
node is moved to set B.
• Step 2: As set I contains minimum paths between the starting point and
the points in set A, every node in B can only be connected to starting
point in one way and has therefore only one distance to the starting point.
The node with the minimum distance from the starting point is moved
to set A and the corresponding branch is moved to set I.
Steps 1 and 2 are repeated until the end point Y is transferred into set A, which
means that the shortest path is found.
As the shortest path is created using the actual distances between the visited
nodes, this algorithm always finds the shortest path between the start node
and the end node.
4.5.2 A* shortest path algorithm
The heuristic A* shortest path algorithm determines the shortest path between
a starting point X and an end point Y by estimating the distance of candidate
nodes and the end point [115]. The algorithm is greedier and therefore faster
than the Dijkstra approach.
Starting from X, the set of nodes connected to the starting node are found and
included in set A. Sequentially for each node in set A, a distance estimation is
performed given in (4.14):
h(X, Y ) = d(X, A) + h(A, Y ) (4.14)
d(X,A) is the known distance between node X and the nodes in set A. h(A, Y )
is an estimate of the distance between the nodes in set A and the end point Y .
From the nodes in set A, the one with the lowest distance estimate h(X, Y ) is
chosen as the next node Anext in the path. The actual distances of all other
nodes in set A to the starting point are saved in set B. These distances are
the minima. In the next iteration, Anext is defined as the new starting point
and set A is recalculated. The estimates are recalculated for the nodes in set
A. As some nodes of set A can be part of set B, also the new estimates for
these nodes are calculated using the distances in the separate set.
As long h(A, Y ) underestimates the distance between the actual node in set
A and the end node (e.g. by using the Euclidean distance), the algorithm
converges to the shortest possible path. The A* algorithm performs faster if
the weights of the graph edges have a large difference as the estimate h(A, Y )
has similar values for all nodes in set A if the Euclidean distance is used. The
algorithm also performs faster if h(A, Y ) overestimates the distance between
node A and the end node Y. In this case there is no guarantee of finding the
shortest path.
Figure 4.6 shows the relative difference between the computation time of
the Dijkstra and the A* algorithm compared to the relative accuracy. The
heuristic estimator has been varied for the A* algorithm in order to speed
up computation. The horizontal axis shows the length of the shortest path
obtained with the A* algorithm divided by the length obtained by the Dijkstra
CASE STUDY 83
algorithm. The vertical axis shows the computation time of the A* algorithm
divided by the computation time of the Dijkstra algorithm. The calculations
are performed for different possible transmission paths and power ratings of
the illustrated case study in section 4.6.
Computation time: A* / Dijkstra
. .
Path 1
0.6 . .
Path 2
. .
Path 3
. .
Path 4
0.4
0.2
0.
1 1.05 1.1 1.15
Path length: A* / Dijkstra
Figure 4.6: Comparison of computation time of the Dijkstra and A* shortest path algorithm
The figure shows that the A* star algorithm reaches 5 to 10 times improvement
in computational efficiency without compromising the accuracy. Graphs with
a higher number of nodes can be analysed using the same computation time as
with the Dijkstra algorithm. This allows the analysis of larger areas and the
use of higher spatial resolutions during the analysis.
4.6 Case study
In this section, the application of the developed optimization methodology is

shown. The case study is based in IEEE 24 bus test system [116]. During the
calculation of the maximum power injection capabilities, the line limits, the
maximum generation capacity and the load values of the network are increased.
The line impedances are kept constant. The network data of the modified IEEE
24 bus test system is provided in appendix A. The network is divided in two
different zones between whom the desired interconnection capability is realised.
Zone 1 consists of buses 1 to 12 and bus 24 whereas zone 2 consists of buses 13
to 23. As possible connection points for the additional lines, 5 candidate buses
are chosen in each zone which are depicted in figure 4.7.
The area of focus contains offshore areas and prohibited areas (a 3rd country)
and several zones where the installation costs of different equipment types
have different values. Table 4.1 shows the used weights to take the varying
installation costs into account. These weights are chosen arbitrarily and do not
necessarily reflect real installation and land acquisition costs. The values are
chosen such that different technology options and line routings become feasible.
A complete case study with realistic grid and geographic data is provided in
chapter 6.
Big city Node 21
250 Mountain
Field Node 23
Node 20
200
ZONE 2 Node 13 Node 14

City
150 Prohibited zone
ZONE 1
Node 12
Mountain Hill
100 City Node 11
Node 9 Node 3
50 Field
Node 10
Big city Sea
Mountain
0 ..
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 4.7: Spatial map of area of focus showing candidate nodes in both zones. The case
study resembles the eastern border between France and Spain, although no attempt is made
to use actual data.
Table 4.1: Spatial weights of the sub areas for the different technology options
Area AC OHL DC OHL AC UGC DC UGC

Field 1 1 1 1
Hill 2.5 2.5 1 1
Mountain 10 10 4.5 4.5
Sea 40 40 0.75 0.75
City 10 10 2 2
Big city 40 40 2.5 2.5
Prohibited area 40 40 40 40
A number of scenarios with different input parameters are analysed to verify

that the proposed methodology converges towards the global optimum. The
total interconnection power, P inter and the maximum power per path, K are
varied in the scenarios. Two different spatial resolutions are considered in the
CASE STUDY 85
calculations in order to verify the computational efficiency. Possible power

ratings of transmission paths are defined as multiples of 100 MW. In this
example, a transmission voltage of 400 kV is chosen for AC, whereas ±320 kV
is used for DC transmission. The total transmission system cost,
∑
Ctot = Cequipment (4.15)
Nb
is the final outcome of the iterative optimization methodology where Nb is the

number of paths containing transmission equipment and Cequipment is the cost
of equipment for each path consisting of investment, installation and possible
land acquisition costs. The maintenance costs can be added to the investment
costs to account for operational costs. The costs for losses are not considered
as due to network abstraction actual flows are unknown. Nevertheless, as
each feasible solution is delivered as output, a re-ranking can be performed
afterwards using the full grid representation including proposed topologies.
Table 4.2 compares the computation time as well as the cost difference between
the solutions obtained with the proposed iterative method and global optimum
∆Ctot . The global optimum is found using a brute force approach. Therefore,
the minimum costs for each possible transmission path and power rating are
calculated using both optimal routing algorithms. Once the minimum costs for
each path and transmission path are known, the global optimum is determined
by applying the MILP optimization as described in section 4.3.
Table 4.2 shows that the iterative approach finds the global optimum or near
optimum in a fraction of the computation time required for the brute force
approach. The table clearly shows that the savings in computation time are
higher in case of higher spatial resolutions. The computation time for the
optimal routing algorithm increases exponentially with the resolution, whereas
the computation time for the MILP algorithm is largely unaffected by the
spatial resolution. The efficiency of the MILP algorithm depends on the
number of optimization variables and the costs used in the objective function
formulation. The number of optimization variables is independent of the
spatial resolution, whereas the costs only vary insignificantly due to the spatial
resolution.
The weight of an edge is determined using the average of weights of the starting
and terminating node. By using a different spatial resolution, the weight of an
edge may change depending on the location of different spatial areas (figure 4.8).
Figure 4.9 shows how the obtained final grid topology is affected by the
resolution of the spatial map used. Although the choice of the connected nodes
and the power ratings of the connections are the same, there is a clear difference
Table 4.2: Comparison of proposed method (PRO) and brute force calculation
(BFC), excluding N-1
P inter K Resolution Algorithm Ctot ∆Ctot Time (min)

(MW) (MW) (km) (Me) % PRO BFC
7000 2000 4 Dijkstra 2373 0 111 637
4 A* 2373 0 59 361
8 Dijkstra 2258 1.36 19 80
8 A* 2258 1.36 13 41
7000 3000 4 Dijkstra 2185 0 88 986
4 A* 2185 0 61 547
8 Dijkstra 2094 0 19 123
8 A* 2094 0 18 63
8000 2000 4 Dijkstra 2719 0 87 637
4 A* 2719 0 57 361
8 Dijkstra 2582 0 9 80
8 A* 2582 0 5 41
8000 3000 4 Dijkstra 2503 0 108 986
4 A* 2503 0 82 547
8 Dijkstra 2441 0 34 123
8 A* 2441 0 17 63
1 1 1 2 2 Resolution=1 km
.
1×1 1×1 1 × 1.5 1×2 wtot = 5.5
1 1 2 Resolution=2 km
2×1 2 × 1.5 wtot = 5
Figure 4.8: Effect of spatial resolution on edge weights
between the line routes and the used technology. For instance, in the HVDC
connection between nodes 3 and 21, the optimal routing algorithm with a 8 km
resolution delivers a combination of overhead lines and underground cables
including an offshore cable section (figure 4.9a). By using a 4 km resolution,
the HVDC link is proposed to be built with overhead lines only (figure 4.9b).
Figure 4.10 shows the obtained transmission system in case circuit additions
are made to ensure N-1 security of the overlay system. Compared to figure 4.9b,
CONCLUSIONS 87
the proposed topology has changed. Although in the N secure case the topology
of figure 4.9b is 7% cheaper than the topology of figure 4.10, in the N-1 secure
solution that of figure 4.10 becomes 1.3% cheaper. The total investments are
approximately 60% higher if the additional transmission system is designed as
N-1 secure. In this case, a cost benefit analysis should be conducted taking
the expected unavailability and the resulting costs in case of an outage into
account. If the expected costs of outages do not justify a cost increase of 60%,
the additional system can be designed N secure.
4.7 Conclusions
This chapter provides a methodology to efficiently optimize the transmission

system topology, technology, rating and routing taking into account spatial
properties. The goal of the optimization is to realise a given interconnection
capacity with a minimum on investments consisting of equipment costs and
installation costs. The proposed optimization methodology is able to deal with
non-linear and discontinuous investment costs to better reflect the lumpiness
of transmission system investments.
The main advantage of the demonstrated methodology is that the transmission
route and the technology are optimized together. This allows to include area
specific installation costs due to soft constraints. For instance, constraints
regarding electromagnetic field emissions, visual, environmental and social
influencing factors can be reflected in the optimization process. In regions
where the effect of these soft constraints is expected to be higher, the area
specific weights can be set higher. This way, the transmission route and
technology obtained comply with the associated soft constraints. It should
be noted that these aspects are difficult to quantify, requiring interaction with
the grid planner to analyse different scenarios and sensitivities.
Using an iterative approach, the developed methodology is able to achieve
significant computation time savings helping to analyse a larger number of
scenarios regarding different input parameters, such as the spatial weights, the
maximum power per path, equipment and installation costs.
In this chapter it is shown that the choice of the spatial resolution has an effect
on the selection of the route as well as the choice of technology. Therefore
it is important to use a routing algorithm which allows a sufficient level of
accuracy. This chapter provides two different shortest path algorithms to
optimize transmission route and technology. The heuristic A* algorithm proves
to be 30 to 50% faster than the Dijkstra algorithm without compromising
accuracy.
The chapter also shows that the obtained optimal transmission topologies
in the N and N-1 secure cases are generally different. Before designing the
additional transmission system N-1 secure, it is important to conduct a cost
benefit analysis to compare the extra cost of making the system N-1 secure
versus the expected costs due outage for a N secure designed system.
The methodology provided here is only of static nature and considers the
transmission system to be built at once. As the development of the system
is multi-year process, the methodology has to be modified to assess temporal
effects. The following chapter provides the necessary information to improve
the developed methodology.
CONCLUSIONS 89
Node 21
250
Node 23
Node 20
200
Node 13 Node 14
150
Node 12
100 Node 11
Node 9 Node 3
50
Node 10
0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
(a) Optimal topology calculated with a resolution of 8km excluding N-1
Node 21
250
Node 23
Node 20
200
Node 13 Node 14
150
Node 12
100 Node 11
Node 9 Node 3
50
Node 10
0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
(b) Optimal topology calculated with a resolution of 4km excluding N-1
Figure 4.9: Comparison of different resolutions. Red colour indicates HVAC connections.
White colour indicates HVDC connections. Solid lines indicate underground cables. Circles
indicate overhead lines. P inter = 8000 M W , K = 2000 M W
Node 21
250
Node 23
Node 20
200
Node 13 Node 14
150
Node 12
100 Node 11
Node 9 Node 3
50
Node 10
0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 4.10: Optimal topology calculated with a resolution of 4 km including N-1 for P inter =
8000 M W , K = 2000 M W
Chapter 5
Optimization of Investment
Time Points
The future depends on what you do today. - Mahatma Gandhi
5.1 Introduction
Transmission system investment projects are very long lasting infrastructure

projects. Transmission lines, cable connections, power transformers or HVDC
links built three or four decades ago are still in operation. The planning process
of such durable infrastructure is very complex, iterative and time consuming.
The transmission system investment process consists of several phases starting
from initial planning at the current state of the grid until the construction and
commissioning phase (figure 5.1). This entire process usually requires several
years up to decades until the assets are built, commissioned and operated.
Therefore, large transmission system investments are always planned for long
term needs rather than for short term solutions.
While creating an investment plan for future investments, it is very important
to align location, type and time point of individual investments. Although
postponing investments is economically more feasible in general, it can make
sense to overrate transmission lines, in case more generation is planned to be
connected in future. The overrating of a transmission line can result in the
selection of a different technology and transmission route, as it was shown
in chapter 4. Such a behaviour is currently observed for offshore wind farms
91
92 OPTIMIZATION OF INVESTMENT TIME POINTS
Technical-and-non-technical-
parameters
State-of-system:-
generation,-load,- Scenarios Possible-reinforcements
topology
Expected-generation Possible-nodes
Expected-load Possible-ratings
Aging-assets Possible-technologies
For-each-possible-reinforcement
Right-of-way
Permission-process Construction Commissioning
Costs
Technical-and-non-technical- Technical-and-non-technical-
parameters parameters
Figure 5.1: The process of transmission system investments [117]
located far from the coast. Although not all offshore wind farms start operation
at the same time, offshore wind farms are connected in clusters. The power is
transmitted to shore using connections with higher power ratings, decreasing
the cost compared to individual connections significantly. Following [11, 117]
it is in most cases still economically more beneficial to build clusters even if
offshore wind farm projects are severely delayed.
By determining the sequence of investments, a prioritisation of the investments
is performed. Assets with the highest priority are built first whereas assets
with the lowest priority are postponed as far as possible. The priority of an
investment is influenced by different parameters.
System requirements indicate the necessity of building an asset due to expected
future generation, demand and power flows. An investment can only be
postponed so far, until the system is operated at its limits. If a certain
investment is delayed further, shortages of electricity supply can occur.
Technical feasibility indicates the availability of a technology. It can be
economically more feasible to postpone an investment until a technology is
more mature. This way higher power ratings or lower transmission losses might
PROBLEM FORMULATION 93
be achieved without increasing necessary investments.

Economical feasibility indicates that the most expensive assets should be
postponed as much as possible. Future investments are in general less expensive
in today’s currency as future spendings are depreciated.
Investment risk indicates that investments with the lowest risk should be
realised first as they are the least likely to fail. The main reason of investment
risk is the lack of information and the level of uncertainty. Investments
with a higher risk can be postponed in order to obtain more information
about the development of the electricity market, demand, generation capacity
and technology availability. Additionally there is an uncertainty in terms of
permitting and construction of assets. If more and reliable information is
available, the investment risk decreases.
The priority of investments may be changed by political decisions. For instance,
due to the change in energy, climate or environmental policies the priority of
investments may need to be adjusted. Besides priority, also the investments
might be chosen which comply better with the policy although being not the
best technical or economical solution.
This chapter provides an addition to the optimization methodology described
in Chapter 4. A time point optimization is included in the optimization
methodology in order to analyse and quantify the above discussed parameters.
Section 5.2 shows how the objective function and optimization constraints are
modified to include time point optimization. Section 5.3 illustrates in detail how
the above mentioned parameters influence the final grid topology, technology
selection and total investment costs. During the analysis, the case study of
Section 4.6 is used as a basis.
5.2 Problem formulation
To include time point optimization, only the MILP problem statement of

the optimization methodology is modified. The structure of the optimization
methodology where MILP and optimal routing algorithms are used iteratively is
kept (figure 4.1). In order to make the optimal routing problem time dependent,
the used spatial weights for installation costs can be defined separately for
each time point. This way expected changes in the topography, the population
density, building density or future natural reserves can be modelled. In the
case studies shown in the remainder of the thesis, the spatial weights are kept
constant over time as there is little information about the change of these spatial
parameters. Eventually, the costs obtained by the optimal routing algorithm
have to be depreciated according to investment time points as the optimization

of topology and rating considers time dependent costs.
To optimize the topology and power rating, a binary decision variable has been
defined for each possible path between candidate nodes and for each possible
power rating of the new built assets (section 4.3). In order to include time
point optimization, the MILP problem statement has been extended by another
dimension, the time. Therefore, the search space has been redefined by using
a binary decision variable for possible path, power rating and time point.
In the static case, the number of optimization variables was Ns = 2 · Nb · Nk ,
where Nb is the number of possible branches and Nk the number of possible
power ratings. By including optimization time points, the number of
optimization variables increases to Ns = 2 · Nb · Nk · Nt , where Nt is the
number of discrete investment time points during the planning horizon defined
by the grid planner.
The objective of the MILP problem statement is the minimization of
transmission system costs over the entire planning horizon.
( ) ( ) ( )
min
+ −
Ccap = U + + U − : ⃗1 ⊗ k : ⃗1 ⊗ t · C̃ : L (5.1)
∀ U ,U
∈ B Nb ×Nk ×Nt
∑∑∑( )
+ −
= Uijt + Uijt · Kijt · C̃ijt · Lijt
i j t
(5.2)
The vector C̃ contains the costs for each transmission path and power rating.
The elements of C̃ have to be defined separately for each optimization time
point t,
C̃ = [Cij,t=0 , Cij,t=1 , . . . , Cij,t=Nt ] (5.3)
As future expenses are worth less in today’s currency, the elements of the cost
vector C̃ have to be depreciated over time
Cij,t=x = Cij,t=0 · (1 − q)x , 1≥q≥0 (5.4)

PROBLEM FORMULATION 95
where q is a user defined discount rate. As the discount rate is greater than zero,
future costs are always lower than at the starting year of the planning horizon.
The optimization solver always postpones more expensive investments, as the
more expensive solutions have the highest depreciation. The postponement of
more expensive investments can only go as far as the optimization constraints
allow it. The inclusion of the time point optimization requires the adaptation
of existing constraints and the inclusion of several new constraints which are
illustrated in (5.5) - (5.10).
( )
Ptinter ≤ U+ + U− : l ⊗ k ∀ t ∈ [1, Nt ] (5.5)
( + −
)
PM P IC,t ˜ tot
≥ ∆ ∀ t ∈ [1, Nt ] (5.6)
M P IC · U + U ·k
( ) ( )
Ct ≥ U + + U − : ⃗1 ⊗ k · C̃ : L ∀ t ∈ [1, Nt ] (5.7)
−
0 = +
Udl + Udl ∀ t ≤ tdl (5.8)
( )
⃗1 ≥ Ehvdc · U + + U − ∀ t ≤ tHV DC (5.9)
hvdc hvdc
K, ∀ i ∈ [1, Nb ] ≥ Ki (5.10)
Constraint (5.5) states that the sum of power ratings of tie lines between
zones must be equal or greater than the desired interconnection capacity.
This constraint has to be fulfilled separately for each time step of the
planning horizon. In (5.5), l is a vector indicating tie lines between the
considered zones (eq. (4.5)). As discussed previously in this thesis, the
desired interconnection capacity is provided by a market based algorithm
calculating the optimal necessary interconnection capacity between zones. The
interconnection constraint requires that the desired interconnection capacity is
provided for each time step of the planning horizon.
Constraint (5.6) enforces that the maximum power injection capabilities of
candidate nodes are not exceeded. Similar to the cost matrix C̃, ∆ ˜ tot
M P IC is
defined as a Nn × Nt matrix, Nn being the number of candidate nodes. The
elements of ∆˜ tot tot
M P IC contain the matrices ∆M P IC which indicate the change in
the injection capabilities of candidate nodes depending on the power ratings of
possible branches,
[ tot ]
˜ tot
∆ tot tot
M P IC = ∆M P IC,t=0 , ∆M P IC,t=1 . . . , ∆M P IC,t=Nt (5.11)
The definition of ∆tot

M P IC has been already been provided in equations (4.10)
and (3.1) together with the probabilistic calculation procedure for the elements
of the matrices.
Usually, transmission system operators have to obtain the necessary capital
for transmission system investments on the capital market. The amount
of available capital for transmission system operators is determined by their
financial status and is limited in a certain investment period. Therefore, a new
optimization constraint is included to take the limitation of capital availability
into account. Constraint (5.7) states that the sum of investments in a particular
time step may not be higher than a defined maximum investment C t . The
1 × Nt vector Ct contains the maximum investments per term which can have
different values at each investment time point
[ ]
Ct = C1 , C2 , . . . , CNt (5.12)
By varying the elements of Ct , several different investment sequences and grid

configurations can be obtained. This helps the grid planner to analyse the
effects of capital availability on the final grid configuration and the total net
present value of investment options. By comparing the different investment
sequences, the grid planner can prioritize different investments and reduce
investment risks.
Transmission system investment projects face delays due to internal and
external factors. Internal factors include delays in the supply chain for
equipment as well as delays in construction due to unforeseen technical or
geographical obstacles. Internal delays occur rarely. External factors occurring
often include delays in the planning and permission process, mostly due to
public resistance or policy issues. It is important to analyse the effect of possible
delays on the final transmission grid topology and the resulting costs in order
to identify priority corridors. Constraint (5.8) includes possible delays in the
optimization model. The constraint states that certain transmission paths can
+ −
only be built after a pre-defined time point of the planning horizon. Udl and Udl
+ −
are sub-sets of the binary decision variables U and U respectively, defining
which transmission paths are the ones facing delays. The vector tdl assigns
+ −
time points to each element of Udl and Udl from where on connections on
these paths may be realised. For instance, to determine how long a line can be
postponed from the system point of view, the time point in the delay vector can
be increased step by step, until no feasible solution is found or the connection
becomes obsolete. Connections which can only be delayed or postponed for a
short time period will be the ones with the highest priority and vice versa.
APPLICATION OF THE TIME POINT OPTIMIZATION 97
Another interesting aspect in long term planning is technology availability.

Depending on technology availability, the final grid topology and final
investment costs can be different. To analyse the effect of availability of
meshed HVDC configurations, constraint (5.9) has been introduced in the
MILP optimization problem. The constraint states that for all time points
t which are smaller than a defined time point tHV DC no multi-terminal or
+ −
meshed HVDC configuration is possible. Uhvdc and Uhvdc indicate the decision
variables of paths which are established with HVDC and Ehvdc is an incidence
matrix. Ehvdc has the size NN ×Nb , where NN is the number of candidate nodes
and Nb is the number of possible branches. Ej,i and Ek,i are 1 if branch i is
+ −
an element of Uhvdc and Uhvdc and connects nodes j and k. All other elements
are zero. Constraint (5.9) enforces that only one HVDC connection can be
connected to any node. The variation of tHV DC helps to determine until when
the technological matureness of multi-terminal HVDC configurations must be
reached so it is still economically feasible to build such configurations. If the
technology maturity is not reached by that time point, only point to point
connections are built until the end of the planning horizon.
Constraint (5.10) states that the maximum power rating of a connection path
may not exceed a pre-defined maximum rating K.
5.3 Application of the time point optimization
This section shows the application of the time point optimization delivering
a stepwise investment plan as output. The calculations are based on the
geography and grid data of the example shown in Section 4.6.
Figure 5.2 shows the result of the time point optimization for four chosen time
points, t = [0, 4, 8, 12] years. The desired additional interconnection capacity
between both zones is 2400 MW in year 0, 2600 MW in year 4, 2600 MW in
year 8 and 2400 MW in year 12 equal to additional 10 GW of interconnection
capacity at the end of the planning horizon. The maximum power rating for
single transmission paths is K = 3000 M W . Figure 5.2 depicts the resulting
expansion plan for the base case where the constraints for meshed HVDC, line
delays and maximum investment per time step are relaxed. The relaxation
of these constraints delivers the cheapest possible solution under the taken
assumptions. By using more strict constraints on the optimization problem,
the obtained solution can only be more expensive.
In the first time step, two AC connections are established between nodes 23
and 12 containing an offshore cable section. Between nodes 23 and 14, a local
reinforcement is placed using an AC overhead line configuration. In year 4,
an HVDC overhead line connection is established between nodes 21 and 3. In

years 8 and 12 HVDC overhead line connections between nodes 21 and 10 and
nodes 20 and 3 are established respectively. This results in a multi-terminal
HVDC scheme consisting of nodes 3, 10, 20 and 21. In the base case, the total
investments over the entire planning horizon equal 2413.4 Me. The power
ratings of the connections and their total costs are summarized in table 5.1.
non−disc disc
The table shows non-discounted (Ctot ) and discounted costs (Ctot ) using
an discount rate of 5 %.
Table 5.1: Cost, length and time points of built links in the base case
non−disc disc
From node To node Rating Time point Ctot Ctot Length
(MW) (Me) (Me) (km)
12 23 2600 1 598.6 598.6 129.7
23 14 200 1 73.7 73.7 54.7
3 21 2600 2 847.9 690.6 253.8
10 21 2600 3 911.2 604.5 303.5
3 20 2200 4 825.2 445.9 299
5.3.1 Variation of meshed HVDC constraint
In this section, the multi-terminal HVDC constraint is enforced during the

MILP optimization. The maximum investment and the line delay constraints
remain relaxed. In the base case, the first multi-terminal configuration was
established after the 8th year of the planning horizon (figure 5.2). Therefore,
two cases are analysed. In the first case, multi-terminal HVDC operation is
allowed only after the 12th year, whereas in the second case multi-terminal
HVDC operation is not allowed throughout the planning horizon.
Figure 5.3 and table 5.2 show the obtained investment sequence and the detailed
breakdown of costs for case one. Figure 5.3 depicts that the final grid topology
is different to the base case. In the first time step, two HVAC links are
established. In the second time step an HVDC overhead line connection is
built. In third step, where still no multi-terminal operation is possible, another
point to point link is established between nodes 10 and 21. In the last time
step, the first multi-terminal link is established between nodes 3 and 10 and
21. The total costs of the obtained system are 47.7 Me higher than in the base
case.
Table 5.2 shows that although the starting and terminating points of the
links are not changed, different power ratings are used to fulfil the desired
interconnection capability. As mentioned earlier throughout this work,
Node 21 Node 21
250 250
Node 23 Node 23
Node 20 Node 20
200 200
Node 13 Node 14 Node 13 Node 14
150 150
Node 12 Node 12
100 Node 11 Node 11

100
50 50
Node 10 Node 10
0. 0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
(a) Time point 1 (b) Time point 2
Node 21 Node 21
250 250
Node 23 Node 23
Node 20 Node 20
200 200
Node 13 Node 13 Node 14
Node 14
150 150
Node 12 Node 12
Node 11 100 Node 11

100
50 50
Node 10 Node 10
0. 0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
(c) Time point 3 (d) Time point 4
Figure 5.2: Optimal investment plan of base case. Red colour indicates HVAC connections.
White color indicates HVDC connections. Solid lines indicate underground cables. Circles
differences in power ratings may result in different route and technology

selections. In this case, we can see that the HVDC link connecting nodes 3
and 21 has a power rating of 2200 MW, resulting in the use of overhead lines
combined with underground and submarine cables. In the base case, the same
HVDC link has a power rating of 2600 MW and consists entirely of overhead
lines using another transmission route. The difference in power ratings requires
a different number of circuits and cross sections resulting in the selection of a
different transmission route and technology.
Figure 5.4 and table 5.3 show the obtained expansion plan if multi-terminal
HVDC operation is not allowed throughout the entire planning horizon.
Figure 5.4 depicts that the most HVDC connections are substituted by HVAC
connections if multi-terminal HVDC operation is not possible. In this case,
only one HVDC link, connecting nodes 10 and 21, is selected in the final grid
topology. In the final topology 6 links are established instead of 5 in the
previous two cases. The total costs of the obtained system are 98.2 Me higher
Node 21 Node 21
250 250
Node 23 Node 23
Node 20 Node 20
200 200
Node 13 Node 13 Node 14
Node 14
150 150
Node 12 Node 12
100 Node 11 Node 11

100
50 50
Node 10 Node 10
0. 0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Node 21 Node 21
250 250
Node 23 Node 23
Node 20 Node 20
200 200
150 150
Node 12 Node 12
100 Node 11 100 Node 11
50 50
Node 10 Node 10
0. 0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 5.3: Optimal investment plan if multi-terminal HVDC may first be built in time point
4. Red colour indicates HVAC connections. White color indicates HVDC connections. Solid
lines indicate underground cables. Circles indicate overhead lines. P inter = 10000 M W ,
K = 3000 M W
Table 5.2: Cost, length and time points of built links, with constraint on multi-
terminal HVDC
non−disc disc
(MW) (Me) (Me) (km)
12 23 3000 1 670.8 670.8 129.7
23 14 600 1 83.5 83.5 54.7
3 20 2200 2 825.2 672.2 299
10 21 2600 3 911.2 604.5 303.5
3 21 2200 4 796 430.1 269.1
than the base case equal to 4.12 %. It should be noted that these costs only
reflect the investment and installation costs. In this case, the total length of
transmission system is increased to 1193 km compared the 1041 km of the base
case. The additional 152 km of lines and cables affect the costs for maintenance
which is not considered in this calculation.
Node 21 Node 21
250 250
Node 23 Node 23
Node 20 Node 20
200 200
150 150
Node 12 Node 12
100 Node 11 Node 11

100
50 50
Node 10 Node 10
0. 0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Node 21 Node 21
250 250
Node 23 Node 23
Node 20 Node 20
200 200
150 150
Node 12 Node 12
100 Node 11 Node 11

100
50 50
Node 10 Node 10
0. 0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 5.4: Optimal investment plan if multi-terminal HVDC is not allowed. Red colour
indicates HVAC connections. White color indicates HVDC connections. Solid lines indicate
underground cables. Circles indicate overhead lines. P inter = 10000 M W , K = 3000 M W
Table 5.3: Cost, length and time points of built links if multi-terminal HVDC
is not allowed
non−disc disc
(MW) (Me) (Me) (km)
11 23 1400 1 376.4 376.4 153.1
12 23 1000 1 254.5 254.5 129.7
10 21 2600 2 911.2 742.2 303.5
3 21 3000 3 1097.5 728.1 269.1
12 20 1400 4 546.6 295.4 262.5
12 14 600 4 212.9 115.1 75.4
5.3.2 Variation of line delay constraint
This section shows how the optimal grid topology is affected if certain
connections cannot be established before a dedicated time point tdl of the
planning horizon. During the calculations, the multi-terminal HVDC and the
maximum investment constraint have been relaxed. In the analysed cases, so
far the HVAC connection between nodes 12-14 and nodes 12-23 have been
chosen in the first time step of the planning horizon. Figure 5.5 depicts the
investment sequence if these two connections cannot be established in the first
time step of the planning horizon, e.g. due to delays in permitting process. In
this case we can see that the final grid topology is the same as in the base
case as these connections are built in the second time step instead of the first
time step. Nevertheless, the total costs are increased by 32.6 Me, due to the
difference in the investment sequence.
Node 21 Node 21
250 250
Node 23 Node 23
Node 20 Node 20
200 200
150 150
Node 12 Node 12
Node 11 100 Node 11
100
50 50
Node 10 Node 10
0. 0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Node 21 Node 21
250 250
Node 23 Node 23
Node 20 Node 20
200 200
150 150
Node 12 Node 12
Node 11 100 Node 11
100
50 50
Node 10 Node 10
0. 0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 5.5: Optimal investment plan if connections between 12-14 and 12-23 are allowed
in the second time step of the planning horizon. Red colour indicates HVAC connections.
White color indicates HVDC connections. Solid lines indicate underground cables. Circles
Figure 5.6 shows the investment sequence if the connections between nodes 12-
14 and 12-23 are delayed until the third time step of the planning horizon. In
this case we can see that these connections are not established during the entire
planning horizon even although they would have been possible in time steps 3
and 4. This means that after the investments made in the first two time steps,
it is not the most economic solution to establish connections between nodes
12-14 and 12-23. The total costs of this configuration are 67.1 Me higher than
the base case.
This simple example shows how important it is to take possible delays in the
planning process into account. The example shows that the economical benefits
of putting the lines in place is only given until a certain point in time. If the
investments cannot be achieved until then, another investment plan should be
favoured.
Node 21 Node 21
250 250
Node 23 Node 23
Node 20 Node 20
200 200
150 150
Node 12 Node 12
100 Node 11 100 Node 11
50 50
Node 10 Node 10
0. 0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Node 21 Node 21
250 250
Node 23 Node 23
Node 20 Node 20
200 200
150 150
Node 12 Node 12
100 Node 11 100 Node 11
50 50
Node 10 Node 10
0. 0.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280
Figure 5.6: Optimal investment plan if connections between 12-14 and 12-23 after the third
step of planning horizon. Red colour indicates HVAC connections. White color indicates
HVDC connections. Solid lines indicate underground cables. Circles indicate overhead lines.
P inter = 10000 M W , K = 3000 M W
5.3.3 Variation of maximum investment constraint
This section shows how the optimal investment sequence is affected if the capital
availability is constrained. The meshed HVDC constraint and the line delay
constraints are relaxed during this analysis. In the base case which is the
cheapest option, 672.3 Me, 690.6 Me, 604.5 Me and 445.9 Me were spent
in each investment time period (table 5.1). This equals to total transmission
system costs of 2413 Me.
Table 5.4 shows the total investment costs obtained for different combinations
of capital availability. The table shows that in the first two investment time
steps, at least 1400 Me have to be invested in order to realise the desired
interconnection capacity. Cases where less capital is available in the first two
steps result in infeasibility. The table shows that the best solutions are found
there, where the capital availability is approximately equally divided. The
reason is that the desired interconnection capacity is equally divided over the
planning horizon. The optimization algorithm places the cheapest connections
first. Although the investments in the following time steps are more expensive
in future currency, in the currency of time point 1, they have a similar value
to the investments of the first time step. In the base case, 1050.4 Me have
been invested in the third and fourth time step. The only way of decreasing
the investment costs in the last time steps is to seriously over-invest in the first
years of the planning horizon. Table 5.4 shows that more than 1700 Me have
to be invested in the first two time steps to reduce the spendings in the third
and fourth time step. Obviously, this results in an overall worse economic
performance compared to the case where capital is not constrained.
5.4 Conclusions
This chapter shows how the optimization of investment time points is included
in the proposed optimization methodology. The time point optimization is
achieved by modifying the problem formulation of the MILP optimization.
Therefore decision variables for investment time points are included in the
search space. Three new constraints are included in the problem formulation, in
order to take capital availability, possibility of multi-terminal HVDC operation
and possible line delays into account.
The analysed case study shows the importance of taking the afore-mentioned
constraints into account. If technical developments or realization of investment
projects are delayed, the optimal grid topology can be different than in the
initially assumed investment plan. Uncertainties in technological developments
CONCLUSIONS 105
Table 5.4: Total costs of investments with constraint on capital availability

∑
C1 C2 C 1 +C 2 C3 C4 C 3 +C 4 C Ctot
(Me) (Me) (Me) (Me) (Me) (Me) (Me) (Me)
700 1000 1700 400 400 800 2500 nsff
1000 1000 2000 400 200 600 2600 nsff
700 1100 1800 400 400 800 2600 nsff
900 800 1700 700 200 900 2600 nsff
800 800 1600 500 500 1000 2600 nsff
800 700 1500 500 600 1100 2600 nsff
900 600 1500 500 600 1100 2600 nsff
900 600 1500 600 500 1100 2600 2486
1100 400 1500 500 600 1100 2600 nsf
800 650 1450 600 550 1150 2600 2488
700 700 1400 600 600 1200 2600 2490
900 500 1400 700 500 1200 2600 nsff
1000 400 1400 800 400 1200 2600 nsff
700 650 1350 650 650 1300 2650 nsff
900 900 1800 600 300 900 2700 2624
700 1200 1900 400 400 800 2700 2641
1000 500 1500 800 400 1200 2700 2570
1000 500 1500 700 500 1200 2700 2459
1100 1100 2200 400 200 600 2800 nsff
1200 400 1600 800 400 1200 2800 2585
900 400 1300 900 600 1500 2800 nsff
1000 300 1300 900 600 1500 2800 nsff
1200 1100 2300 400 200 600 2900 2813
1200 1200 2400 400 200 600 3000 2783
nsff . . . no feasible solution found
and delays put additional risks on investments which can be reduced by

analysing different scenarios and prioritizing connections. The total economical
benefit of achieving technology maturity can be quantified and analysed with
the provided methodology.
Delays in transmission infrastructure projects are very common, especially if
overhead line technology is used. In this chapter a simple case was shown, where
a delay in the investment causes that a certain connection becomes economically
less beneficial and therefore never built. Other established links can alleviate
the requirements for new investments and a new system architecture can
become economically more feasible. Especially for transmission system
operators this information is very essential. In order to influence regulating
bodies and accelerate the permitting procedure, the "point of no return" for
certain links can be provided to decision makers. If the establishment of the
connection is delayed beyond that point, other expansion options should be
considered.
This chapter also shows how the total system costs are affected if capital avail-
ability is constrained. If future capital availability is uncertain, transmission
system operators can overinvest in short term. The developed algorithm shows
the required overinvestment if future spendings are constrained. This helps to
quantify measures to avoid or decrease future risks in the capital market.
Chapter 6
Application of the
transmission investment
optimization methodology
There is no idea so bad that it cannot be made to look brilliant with the proper
application of fonts and colour - Scott Adams
6.1 Description of case study
In order to demonstrate the possibilities of application, its capabilities and also

functionality, the developed methodology is applied to a larger system for long
term transmission system investment optimization. For the case study, public
available data is used. Hence, the shown results can only be interpreted as
indicative results as a simplified representation of the transmission grid and
limited geographic data could be used.
The starting point of the case study is the roadmap for a low-carbon economy
in Europe for 2050 established by the European Climate Foundation (ECF)
[10, 118]. The roadmap states that additional 33 GW of transmission capacity
between the Iberian peninsula and France may enable economically efficient
integration of solar and wind resources in the European electricity system
(figure 6.1) [10]. As the Iberian peninsula has favourable wind and solar
resources, increased transmission capacity to France is needed to export
107
108 APPLICATION OF THE TRANSMISSION INVESTMENT OPTIMIZATION METHODOLOGY
renewable energy on large scale. This way, social welfare in Europe is

maximized while reducing greenhouse gas emissions according to the European
2050 climate targets.
Figure 6.1: Required additional transmission capacity for 2050 according to [10]
The necessary geographic information for the optimization of transmission tech-

nology and routes is derived from the Socio-economic Data and Applications
Centre (SEDAC). In order to account for social impact, the population density
is used whereas elevation is used to reflect topographic properties (figure 6.2).
In order to assign spatial weights to installation costs, the elevation and
population density maps are imported as graphical images. Depending on
its colour, a different spatial weight is assigned to each pixel of the image. The
smallest possible geographic resolution is limited by the graphical resolution
of the image. With the available elevation and population density maps, the
smallest possible resolution is 2.68 km.
12 different elevation levels have been identified in the used map whereas the
population density map consists of 11 different levels. The spatial weights for
installation costs of different equipment types are provided in Appendix B. In
order to combine both maps, a weighted sum of the population and elevation
weights is used
ae · Welevation + ap · Wpopulation
Wtot = (6.1)
ae + ap
IDENTIFICATION OF STRONG NODES 109
(a) Used population density map [119] (b) Used elevation map [120]
Figure 6.2: Population density and elevation map of the Iberian peninsula and France
where, ae and ap indicate how much the elevation and population density
contribute to the total spatial weight Wtot . In section 6.3, a sensitivity
analysis on ae and ap is performed comparing the optimal solution and total
transmission system costs for different values of ae and ap .
6.2 Identification of strong nodes
The European transmission grid model according to [121] provides a sufficiently

detailed equivalent representation. The transmission grid model consists
of 1494 buses, 2322 branches and 570 generators (figure 6.3). It provides
transmission network data (line impedances), power plant locations, fuel types
of power plants, locations of load centres and the demand in load centres [121].
It is sufficient to use cost ratios between different generation types for the
calculation of maximum power injection capabilities obtained from [122]. The
transmission line ratings serve as constraint for the maximum power injection
capabilities and need to be estimated as the used transmission grid model does
not provide line ratings [121]. Therefore, the number of circuits per branch is
calculated using impedance and distance information of lines. The line ratings
are calculated using 1500 MW and 800 MW per circuit of 380 kV lines and
220 kV lines respectively.
1212:(1502)
374
466:(1032)
1421:(1503)
447
374
467:(1033)
469:(1034) 447
36
468:(1035)
472:(1036)
63
471:(1037) 1331:(1074)
712 -632
470:(1038)
-73 384
1330:(1075)
573
-1681
1329:(1076) 1327:(1078) 1328:(1077)
-1078
1326:(1079)
557
473:(1039) 1325:(1080)
54 213
-96
874
474:(1511)
-302
1324:(1081)
557
1323:(1082)
-950 213
418:(768) 1420:(1510) -216 1322:(1083)

-70
259:(769)
582
52
-302 -472 1321:(1084) 1320:(1085)

-309
250:(771) 248:(772) 253:(770) 1319:(1086)

-950 -1052 589
-2980 327
302:(773) 445:(774)
1350
-70
1318:(1087)
-66
-869 397
-1583
-309 301:(775) 1317:(1088)
-216
2636 -1052
115 1350 327
-123
299:(777) 249:(776) 1313:(1092) 1316:(1089) 1315:(1090) 1314:(1091)
586 589
115 -340
442:(779) 251:(778) 441:(780) 1311:(1094) 1310:(1095) 1309:(1096) 1312:(1093)
115 1808 2965
252:(781) 1308:(1097) -477 589
-1541 -636 -270

432:(782) 1307:(1098)
-276 -123 -244 -664
582
1291 -477 -442
255:(783) 254:(784) 1306:(1099)
1500 731
-115
-636 -233
438:(785) 437:(786) 1305:(1100)
-953 -244 251 251
1500 -2234 -123

258:(789) 435:(787) 433:(790) 436:(788)
-1583 -244
1211:(1509) 434:(791) 1304:(1101) 1302:(1103) 1303:(1102)
-276 495 -219 251
-244 527
-1093 1301:(1104)
-282 -953
-69 1500 -601
428:(794) 266:(793) -6 274:(792) 1300:(1105)
-1529 24 151 294

-88
32
1210:(607) 430:(796) 429:(795) 1299:(1106) 1298:(1107)
267 216 1277 725

267:(798) 427:(797) 1297:(1108)
263 -616 -80
124
-126 -342 180 842 -219 153

1209:(608) 425:(799) 426:(800) 416:(801) 1295:(1110) 1294:(1111) 1293:(1112) 1296:(1109)
51 -422 977 30 623 623 725
263 -145 521 521 -10

1207:(610) 1208:(609) 303:(807) 422:(804) 269:(803) 273:(806) 270:(805) 420:(802) 291:(808) 1292:(1113) 1291:(1114) -105
-616 -80 970 473

495
55 325 -88
1206:(611) 1288:(1117) -219 1289:(1116) 1290:(1115)
-2604 315
-47
977 521 -699 -219

1205:(612) 278:(811) 408:(809) 279:(810) 1287:(1118)
527
-282
1204:(613) 238 414:(812) 1286:(1119)

835 -17
-80
-133 -219 690
282:(814) 280:(813) 1285:(1120)
274
-221 77
281:(815) 289:(817) 410:(816) 1282:(1123) 1284:(1121) 1283:(1122) -80 1281:(1124)
980 165
-447 -674
835 404:(818) 285:(819) -699 1280:(1125) 1086
-828 1147 1195 2 -88

1768
-221 72 -674 -2 -272 73

1203:(614) 1202:(615) 288:(823) 286:(821) 406:(820) 290:(822) 305:(824) 1279:(1126) 527
77 980 -61
-590 -590 2 -1429

1201:(616) 297:(830) 398:(828) 293:(826) 292:(827) 296:(825) 294:(829) 1278:(1127) 1277:(1128)
-828 473
-41 -156 14 631
-221 1653 394:(832) 295:(831) 1276:(1129) -26
288 73 92
784
325 577 -1429
1200:(617) 304:(833) 1195 -88 1275:(1130) 1274:(1131)
-1484 -81 -415 -219 -981 192 -254
2404 566 92
1198:(619) 1199:(618) 388:(834) -156 390:(836) 272:(837) 980 298:(835) 1273:(1132) 1272:(1133) 1270:(1135) 1271:(1134)
205 -266 192
226 249 288

322:(840) 353:(839) -156 456:(838) 313:(841) 1269:(1136) 192
-176 577 -164 -1429
-81 -622 -767 -1429

308:(843) 310:(842) 307:(844) 1268:(1137) 1267:(1138) 1266:(1139)
-520 -473
72 288 -1429
348 205 -252

1197:(620) 382:(845) 246:(846) 311:(847) 1264:(1141) 1265:(1140)
83 1254 -683
325 -669 -510 -164
554 -87 -622 -450 -387 1254 -1435 307 1013

309:(848) 378:(849) 1263:(1142)
111 441 73
319 767 205 257 -841 -683

1196:(621) 1195:(622) 318:(855) 319:(853) 312:(851) 315:(854) 321:(852) 317:(856) 314:(850) 1257:(1148) 1261:(1144) 1256:(1149) 1259:(1146) 1255:(1150) 1260:(1145) 1262:(1143) 1258:(1147)
-800 -87 939 -767 616 441 73

989
-520 443 -26 -26 -11 1027 827 -683

1194:(623) 240:(860) 243:(858) 244:(857) 238:(859) 241:(861) 1254:(1151) 1252:(1153) 1253:(1152)
332 -403 -299 1694 87 989 1013
319 -87
-624 -90
325:(867) 245:(862) 350:(868) 347:(864) 239:(863) 328:(866) 335:(865) 1250:(1156) 1247:(1159) 1249:(1157) 441 1251:(1155) 1248:(1158)
832 535 -646 71 -324
-701 689 1082

-534 565 767 84 -977
1188:(629) 1193:(624) 1192:(625) 323:(869) 348:(871) -520 324:(870) 1245:(1161) 1246:(1160)
-494 685 -977
59 686 827
-494 71
329:(876) 327:(872) 331:(875) -87 334:(874) 326:(873) 1244:(1162) 989 989
1379 -618 -324 -751

-1696 -624 87 87
353
330:(877) 333:(878) 332:(879) 205:(1040) 1241:(1165) 1237:(1169) 1242:(1164) 1243:(1163)
1414 -1075
1694
-981 -552
1187:(1506) 1191:(626) 342:(881) 338:(882) 352:(880) 1240:(1166)
-310 -895 -981 1127 -562 -552 132 826
-480
1414 -310 53
52:(534) -618 337:(883) 340:(885) 336:(884) 220:(1041) 1239:(1167)
-122 1213 73 826
262 -470 -1078

71
53:(556) 1190:(627) 341:(887) 339:(886) 423:(888) 213:(1044) 219:(1043) 236:(1042) 1238:(1168) 935
-38 -470 384

-552
-38
-310 -313 384
59:(536) 51:(535) 209 71:(1507) 465:(893) 346:(890) 345:(891) 344:(892) 349:(889)
496 262 159 565 623 -310 136 -271 -417 -35
13 -977
991:(1250) 58:(539) 69:(537) 68:(538) 363:(895) 387:(894) 358:(896) 234:(1047) 225:(1048) 218:(1045) 214:(1046)
-362 -271 1225
364 881 1219 452 199 -307 -1078 384 384 -417 -249 -249
1189:(628) 360:(899) 366:(898) 359:(900) 357:(897) 211:(1050) 320 216:(1049) 226:(1052) 212:(1051)
-313
-185 881 1219 -313 -94
270
264
-271 -271 1225 400 -277
784:(217) 994 61:(541) 60:(540) 362:(903) 247:(901) 364:(902) 215:(1054) 223:(1057) 235:(1056) 228:(1055) 237:(1053)
1219 339
-999
-185 498 150 -313 -89 64

778:(219) 781:(218) 64:(542) 55:(543) 361:(904) 355:(905) 384:(906) -313 -417
396 -41 64
-29 -89
70:(544) 370:(908) 375:(907) 209:(1059) 229:(1060) 227:(1058) 1483:(1195)
-348 1725 64 -473
-249
-3000 -43 -215 -313 -1051 330
65:(545) 1219 368:(909) 210:(1061) 1481:(1197) 1482:(1196)
12 -179 -101 1169 330
-185 1225
552 -6 -691 384
775:(220) 367:(910) -313 1479:(1199) 1480:(1198) 1478:(1200) 1494:(1244)
1255 711 177 1175 -927
143 -29 -330
497 -368 -273 330

772:(221) 56:(546) 57:(547) 343:(914) 369:(911) 374:(913) 371:(912) 1477:(1201) 1476:(1202) 1474:(1204)
12 -125 498 498 711 -1315 -1315 -1092
-923
184 28
766:(223) 769:(222) 66:(550) 72:(549) 67:(548) 62:(551) 354:(915) 372:(916) 373:(917) 231:(1064) 230:(1062) 221:(1063) 222:(1065) 1475:(1203) 1473:(1205)
-728 -179 867 -40 -273
-41
-2686 -1358 -368 293
-185 12 519 12 380:(919)
26
386:(918) 1472:(1206)
1415
-40
747 747 81 81 439 -6 205 -273 368

759:(225) 762:(224) 50:(555) 54:(552) 385:(922) 376:(920) 379:(921) 208:(1068) 224:(1067) 206:(1066) 177 1471:(1207) 1034:(1170)
-313 439 2596 -20 336 494
-179
-556 314 314 439 -985 460

756:(226) 261:(992) 381:(924) 459:(925) 383:(923) 217:(1069) -215
-572 2596 -680 336 -985 -411 -449

12
81 -1052 293 -795

753:(227) 750:(228) 63:(553) 413:(926) 207:(1070) 1033:(1171) 1031:(1173) 1032:(1172)
129 -1052 -247 -273
26 26
33 482 17 -1990
402:(927) 391:(929) 389:(930) 396:(928) 232:(1071) 1470:(1208) 1492:(1505)
-2686
-572 -53 -158
399 -20
-13 -296 -401 -1052 257 -3000
747:(229) 744:(230) 314 316:(931) 392:(932) -20 204:(1072) 1469:(1209) 1468:(1210)
-572 511 -1147 494
-572 -680 -1990 337

741:(231) 738:(232) -556 1178:(604) 399:(936) 393:(934) 397:(937) 395:(933) 401:(935) 1467:(1211) 1030:(1174)
126
-2747 -563 -401

1926 363 126 -400
729:(235) 129 735:(233) 732:(234) 417:(938) 233:(1073) 1466:(1212)
692 -216 216 171 -129 -661
-1770 -985 -411 -158
291 583
-7
-300 726:(236) 49:(554) 1177:(605)
-303 -421 126 -158 503
436
-296 -194 280 709 709 2090 1002

720:(238) 717:(239) 723:(237) 405:(940) 409:(939) 1465:(1213) 1464:(1214) 1029:(1175)
280 586 525 74 126
291 -13 -216 -158

714:(240) 1176:(606) 407:(943) 403:(941) 412:(945) 415:(944) 300:(942) 464:(946) 1463:(1215)
240 -120 280 216 586
1926
-572
286 701 -1765 -1147
690:(248)
708:(242) 696:(246) 699:(245) 693:(247) 705:(243) 711:(241) 702:(244) 439:(948) 449:(947) 59 1462:(1216) 1028:(1176)
-244 517 70 -209 456
-87
240 -209 -345 363
684:(250) 687:(249) 283:(949) 419:(950) 13:(997) 24:(996) -158
-87 -87 -54 273 -114
-87 -114
92 692 -169 586 -1147 525 -129 363
240 -96 456 -519

675:(253) 681:(251) 678:(252) 421:(952) 431:(953) 287:(951) 1:(1030) 34:(998)
-254 70 222 -86 503
-506 70 -114 -169 456

977:(258) 968:(261) 971:(260) 983:(256) 974:(259) 965:(262) 672:(254) 669:(255) 980:(257) 284:(955) 424:(954) 28:(999) 1461:(1217) 1015:(1177)
586
-117 517 240 -106 456 43 -129 -363 503
391
955:(265) 958:(264) 962:(263) 440:(958) 444:(957) 448:(956) 1460:(1218) 456 1493:(1500)
10 199 147 169 -251 -367 -990 -385
70 74 499 -421
-367 120 199 -261 -261 3 223

952:(266) -117 240 443:(959) 447:(961) 306:(960) 400:(994) 9:(1001) 29:(1000) 1027:(1178)
51
-506 585 -1 3
1017
120 127 -1699 -2471 -503

26 -990
-197 116
946:(269) 947:(268) 938:(274) 940:(272) 942:(271) 949:(267) 944:(270) 939:(273) 275:(963) 446:(962) 271:(964) 42 22:(1002) 12:(1031)
214 -501 2142 585 -276 -366 3
-279 26
-1750 120 -1750 59 237 500 44

642 936:(276) 935:(277) 937:(275) 932:(279) 147 934:(278) 463:(966) 242:(965) 35:(1004) 2:(1003) 1024:(1182) 1023:(1183) 1026:(1179) 1035:(1181) 1025:(1180)
456
-1750 -1750 -261 227 -1856 -366 -366 108 116
-54 965
-1187
-441 -1750 214 -1187 -1856 -49 585
929:(282) 931:(280) 926:(284) 928:(283) 930:(281) 455:(967) 452:(968) 276:(970) 450:(969) 351:(995) 36:(1005) 1022:(1184) 1416:(1485)
992 267 -1856 237 677 223
-519
-1750 255 -625 164 -141 780 106 1119

919:(288) 925:(285) 921:(287) 923:(286) 268:(971) 264:(974) -289 265:(973) 451:(972) 500 21:(1006)
-2786 -1129 43 -808

-1750 456
992 -1187 144 43 237 -81 1308

910:(295) 912:(294) 913:(291) 903:(293)
914:(292) 918:(289) 916:(290) 453:(975) 1013:(1185) 1344:(1484)
-13 214 -604 34 -130 146
-2749 -367
-604 144 106 966 389 100

905:(299) 877:(297) 911:(296) 907:(298) 263:(976) 14:(1007) 30:(1008) 1333:(1498) 1381:(1439) 1417:(1497)
-217 -441 164 -1699
-440
183 141 -604 830 -2804

846:(303) 904:(300) 899:(304) 902:(302) 164 894:(301) 454:(978) 262:(977) 461:(979) 1020:(1187) 100
447 71 141 -141 372 13
3
402 -135 141 830 1722 486 -437 814 -192

897:(306) 896:(307) 156 898:(305) 893:(308) 34 1019:(1188) 1335:(1495) 1343:(1486)
447 -201 1011
50 1107
-398 -992 -437

895:(310) 959:(309) 948:(314) 920:(313) 917:(311) 144 915:(312) 458:(980) 457:(981) 277:(982) 26:(1009) 10:(1010) 1334:(1496) 1341:(1488)
162 370 -521 -1499 1381 696 -201
-670 1107
-380
449 1381 -158 13 -258 -711 -416
891:(318) 889:(320) 927:(317) 890:(319) 922:(316) 924:(315) 256:(984) 257:(983) 780 1021:(1186) 1382:(1438)
-89 -135 -449 449 -437 270
71 141 1119
449 486 609 966

888:(321) -224 886:(323) 887:(322) -141 15:(1011) 1337:(1493) 1380:(1440) 1415:(1489) 1345:(1483)
610 -158 -902
1381
658
610 -121 -320 2877 -160
933:(324) -521 884:(326) 885:(325) 883:(327) 365 260:(985) 411:(993) 1018:(1190) 1012:(1189) 1393:(1441) 1342:(1487)
141
-281 472 1548 363 -711
370 527 283 -620

380 270
878:(330) 880:(328) 943:(332) 941:(331) 945:(333) 879:(329) 141 462:(986) 460:(987) 25:(1012) 1017:(1191) 1336:(1494)
122 122
368 436 -120
328 465 801 -694

-89 875:(335) 876:(334) 874:(336) 365:(989) 320:(988) 6:(1014) 18:(1013) 1016:(1192) 1338:(1492) 1339:(1491) 1340:(1490) -416
274 368 368 134 -200

392 392 -902 331 435
-437
527 -74 150 465 331 -566
869:(341) 872:(338) 873:(337) 850:(340) 851:(342) 847:(339) 177 356:(990) 152:(557) 5:(1016) 23:(1015) 7:(1017) 1379:(1442) 1346:(1482)
830
-78 399 562 224 561 527 443 458
402 -121
-200 30 -2489 -401

867:(345) 856:(343) 865:(347) -74 866:(346) 853:(344) 377:(991) 1543 1543 299 1388:(1430)
-561 566 76 443 974 352
-620 -620
1567 561 484 465 443 -175 -44 -354

859:(348) 881:(349) 140:(561) 175:(559) 139:(558) 174:(560) 20:(1018) 31:(1019) 1014:(1194) 1418:(1437)
484
-224 -1152 856 -175 974 -320 -750
2279 465
1032 126 328 328 118 157 567 744
862:(353) 449 861:(351) 368 882:(354) 864:(352) 860:(350) 172:(565) 170:(563) 180:(562) 179:(564) 32:(1020) 33:(1021) 27:(1022)
1032 283 -224 292 -401
443 194 -200 270
472 -559 157 157 -44 676 307

909:(355) -255 870:(356) 176:(566) 142:(567) 1351:(1476) 1285
1032 1004 360

283 443
857 662 -134 -566

868:(361) 858:(359) 863:(357) 857:(358) 855:(360) 183:(569) 177:(568) 157 4:(1023) 8:(1024) 17:(1025) 19:(1026) 1490:(1219) 1383:(1436) 1285
216 690 -164 -811 -999 760 667
343 605 -164 157 -250 -825 20

854:(362) 849:(364) 852:(363) 146:(570) 143:(572) 168:(571) 974 11:(1028) 3:(1027) 307 1489:(1220) 1443:(1389) 1384:(1435)
45 -333 86 157 1205 -367 760
527
216 -100 546 328 -267 -788 744 -1469 126 136
901:(368) 622 763:(366) 835:(367) 848:(365) -224 662 182:(573) 16:(1029) -750 -401 1350:(1477) 1385:(1434) 1386:(1432)
384 343 -281 -333 704 758 692

-153 -401
1944 760 126 91

892:(369) 908:(370) 906:(371) 185:(574) 186:(1241) 1413:(1473) 1353:(1474) 1349:(1478) 1387:(1431)
216 -100 546 -643

1285
337 -1351 -378 -164 1161 884
900:(372) 167:(575) 149:(576) 147:(577) 1488:(1221) 1354:(1472) 126 1348:(1479) 1332:(1499)
995 546 -164 -825 200
-134
210 -100 704

871:(373) 844:(375) 845:(374) 843:(376) 159:(578) 150:(579) 1159:(630) 1487:(1222) 1372:(1450) 1352:(1475) 1371:(1451)
142
142 210 45 -2375 619 1127
995
174 -336 -259 619 291 -702 -1314
842:(377) 841:(378) 328 171:(581) 145:(580) 1158:(631) -515
377 2999 838 8
86
-100
-246 -236 -164 -1484 -719 -1710 589
-100 840:(379) 839:(380) 838:(381) 154:(584) 162:(582) 173:(583) 1157:(632) 1486:(1223) 1485:(1224) 202:(1227) 1370:(1452) 1355:(1471) 1356:(1470) 1491:(1512)
-518 -332 -338 140
-1484 704 291 360 178 -1710

837:(382) 1155:(634) 1156:(633) 189:(1228) 1427:(1406) 1426:(1407)
367 -518 251 1237 692 692
328
-294 459 -142
833:(385) 836:(383) 832:(386) 834:(384) 178:(589) 144:(586) 158:(590) 153:(587) 156:(585) 157:(588) 1154:(635) 619 201:(1229) 203:(1231) 187:(1508) 197:(1230) 1409:(1449) 136 1411:(1469) 1360:(1464) 1389:(1429)
953 1211
45 995 -2375 -381 -1484 -1484 -1484 -137 -198 -1071 -85 37 -1112 850 -85
-123 655 -24 312 692 692
830:(388) 831:(387) 181:(592) 165:(594) 1152:(637) 141:(591) 184:(593) 1153:(636) 188:(1232) 1373:(1448) 1408:(1453) 1357:(1468) 1358:(1467) 1414:(1433) 1359:(1466) 1361:(1463) 1419:(1481)
283 -331 578 1706 232 182
45 367 529
1135
-89 -89 312 -85 692 692
724
24 692 252
995 995 529 1135 759 363 589

827:(391) 546 828:(390) 829:(389) 251 166:(595) 655 1036:(767) 1149:(640) 1150:(639) 1147:(642) 1148:(641) 1151:(638) 1484:(1226) 1444:(1388) 1405:(1413) 1412:(1465) 1397:(1421) 1347:(1480)
-518 -526 423 759 232 1211 -239 298
-879 -879 -146 363 166
-158 423 142 133 -239 544 252

825:(393) 826:(392) 824:(394) 160:(598) 151:(596) 161:(599) 155:(597) 1144:(645) 1145:(644) 1143:(646) 1146:(643) 291 1445:(1387) 1404:(1414) 1390:(1428) 1391:(1427)
-391 333 333 67 -152
182
-343 -526 -526 -239 804 37 459 284 -434 -639

822:(396) 823:(395) 163:(600) 363 1450:(1382) 140 1369:(1454) 692 1378:(1443) 1392:(1426)
-858 995 995 1135 -417 654 -639 -692 224
82 578 166
-518 23 476 -526 -201 582

358
-123 820:(398) 819:(399) 821:(397) 164:(602) 169:(603) 148:(601) 1142:(647) 244 -702
-95 1316 142 1678 -358

312 358
2 -518 -998 1485 160 160

815:(403) 817:(401) 813:(405) 818:(400) 816:(402) 249 814:(404) 812:(406) 1140:(649) 1141:(648) -294 1139:(650) 191:(1233) 81:(1369) 1446:(1386) 1428:(1405) 1448:(1384) 1449:(1383)
-343 -271 -29 -518 476 -201 -178 -46 -46 260
582
283 -858 1432 -1023 1678 -639981 -713 -790 -692

811:(407) -1376 1138:(651) 1137:(652) 1136:(653) 1135:(654) 93:(1372) 89:(1367) -2515 1451:(1381) 1425:(1408) 1407:(1412) 1403:(1415) 1402:(1416) 1362:(1462)
-314 557 780 -295 -1937 -201 -46 225 225
995 -998
-470 1485 216 430 -438
809:(409) 810:(408) 45 -518 37 1134:(655) 1133:(656) 284 95:(1356) 82:(1355) 1447:(1385) 1452:(1380) 1401:(1417) 224 1406:(1425)
-713
2417 -201 142 1219 425 425 692 225 775 -358
-518 67 38
324 -295 180 -543 142 1219 -207 225 379 -258 -1081
805:(413) 803:(415) 806:(412) 807:(411) 802:(416) 804:(414) 808:(410) 1131:(658) 1132:(657) 1129:(660) 1130:(659) 284 -434 1368:(1455) 1398:(1420)
-589 -589 338 -1254 409 2059 4 -434 -362 498
775
579
304 284 -1937 2417 333 -201 425 425 -39 -207 517
801:(417) 800:(418) 1125:(664) 1124:(666) 1127:(662) 1128:(661) 306 1126:(663) 1122:(668) 1173:(665) 1123:(667) 190:(1234) 200:(1235) 86:(1366)
79:(1354) 1455:(1377) 1374:(1447) 1367:(1456) 1410:(1457) 1400:(1418) 1399:(1419) 1363:(1461) 1394:(1424)
20 -201 1219 1061
995 -53 -31
304 -1937 494 494 -860 -668 -325 -73 -438
799:(419) 797:(421) -271 798:(420) 796:(422) 1121:(669) 1120:(670) 1429:(1404) 1430:(1403) 1364:(1460) 1377:(1444)
494
-3000 -1937 43 -469 696 -207 -1081
-1937 802 802 43 -39 -325 53 -110 -1613

793:(425) 795:(423) 794:(424) 1119:(671) 193:(1236) 252 1395:(1423)
504 -494 802 -153
-56 -207
284 136 1511 -263 179 46 -494 43

792:(426) -29 791:(427) 790:(428) 179 1117:(673) 1118:(672) 92:(1368) 83:(1365) 1431:(1402) 1432:(1401) 47 1396:(1422)
1511 -39 706
2417 517
303 1511 1511 43 -2028
785:(433) -314 786:(432) 787:(431)
788:(430) 789:(429) 1113:(676) -201 1116:(674) 1115:(675) 76:(1364) 1375:(1446)
-45 -848 -494 221 -1133 -325
-1937 53
-609 -679 221 949 -496
782:(435) -1937 -1937 783:(434) 1111:(678) 1110:(679) 1112:(677) 94:(1353) 80:(1371)
-274
-39
-400 -604 -457 221 248 48
-1937 780:(436) 1106:(681) -494 1107:(680) 1434:(1398) 1453:(1379) 1456:(1376) 1365:(1459)
-284 536 -325 358
-496 -325 358 468

777:(438) 774:(440) 779:(437) 771:(442) 773:(441) 776:(439) 1105:(682) 1104:(683) 199:(1237) 91:(1363) 84:(1362) 78:(1370) 1424:(1409) 1376:(1445)
-39
-185 330 1742 185 -595 -457 187 -1133 -496
-2599 -400 -595 1311 443 1483

-126 770:(443) 1101:(684) 1099:(686) 1100:(685) 75:(1361) 1423:(1410) 1435:(1397) 1454:(1378) 1366:(1458) 99:(1337)
2011 451 394 -464
-119
-173 -336 884 -274 432

761:(448) 767:(445) 765:(446) 764:(447) 768:(444) 1437:(1395) -239 110:(1296)
977 443 -585
-281 -496
16 -131 219 -239 536 84 432

757:(451) 760:(449) 758:(450) 1098:(687) 74:(1360) -325 -464
-25 303 884 451 43 215
-2599 -2599 350 586 187 612 -585 104 104

754:(453) 749:(456) -400 751:(455) 752:(454) 755:(452) 1088:(692) 1090:(691) 1093:(688) 1092:(689) 1087:(693) 1091:(690) -106 358 1433:(1400) 1438:(1394) 1439:(1393) 43 101:(1338) 114:(1336) 137:(1299) 123:(1300)
-1133
-2599 303 185 -281 219 432 -570
586 116 -176 55 317

746:(458) 748:(457) 337 745:(459) 743:(460) 1086:(694) 196:(1238) 73:(1352) 1457:(1375) 135:(1339) 122:(1298)
-528 -1173 196
-1133 338 175 84 -78 586
-528 303 120 -1136 536 322

739:(463) 742:(461) 740:(462) 1085:(695) 198:(1240) 195:(1239) 43 131:(1297) 118:(1332) 120:(1335)
675 -656 967 967 280 1691 200 84 -428
219
-1173 280 198 198

737:(464) 734:(466) 736:(465) -247 1082:(697) 1083:(696) 194:(1254) 84 1184:(1345)
-2040 352 -1136 -449 198 -1147 126
-1793 322
453 -422 338 1080:(699)
731:(468) 733:(467) 1079:(700) 1081:(698) 219
1077:(701) 192:(1242) 90:(1351) 1183:(1346)
-2098 -2760 358
-2599 -1147 -78 -570
352
303 727:(471) 728:(470) 730:(469) 1076:(702) 1078:(703) 85:(1359) 84 102:(1331)
-301 967 -239 -1900
49 432
-89 -89 -2098 43

1075:(704) 1185:(1344) 112:(1295) 111:(1294) 98:(1292) 108:(1333) 104
-89 628 -320 -263
-428
453 -239 110 233 -320 -40

724:(473) 722:(474) 725:(472) 721:(475) -656 1074:(705) 1097:(706) 1440:(1392) 103:(1317) 109:(1293)
658 -2040 190 -1136 -320
1850 -667
718:(477) 719:(476) 715:(479) 716:(478) 1071:(708) 1096:(707) 1180:(1349) 1436:(1396) 126 125:(1319) 128:(1320) 113:(1334)
-2098 -320 -603 -196
-88 702 221 -370
713:(480) 1171:(709) 1172:(710) 77:(1358) 87:(1350) -997 133:(1318) 130:(1330) 378 119:(1291)
-191 251 964 294
-239 230
-584 -88 -640 1041 -426 -243
-89 712:(481) 1114:(711) 88:(1357) 1459:(1373) 116:(1288) 106:(1315) 309 97:(1322)
-273 -584 -1556 -134 219 -667 180 910
789 -1900 -432 -223
729
707:(484) 709:(483) -342 710:(482) 1441:(1391) 1458:(1374) 104:(1316) 124:(1321)
-667
-88 1850 496
-222 251 1041 -40

704:(486) 706:(485) 789 1084:(714) 1070:(712) 1103:(713) 1182:(1347) 1186:(1343) -468 1422:(1411) 107:(1323) 127:(1329) 129:(1290)
658 -222 -230 1329 79
303
-357 -195 3000 358 -148 743 199

701:(488) 700:(489) 703:(487) 1095:(715) 1181:(1348) 39:(1309) 1442:(1390) -269
-584 -116 1418

-88 -572
-738 264
691:(495) 698:(490) 695:(492) 692:(494) 694:(493) 697:(491) 1069:(716) 45:(1308) 121:(1328) 138:(1289)
-386 -662 -49 1298 281
-88 -269
-738
-312 -58
540:(25) 689:(496) 688:(497) 1072:(717) 110 -105 984:(1284)
-222 -485 -386 -108 62
-314 79 743 199
1120
-820 -36
683:(500) 682:(501) 685:(499) 686:(498) 48:(1307) 988:(1283) 134:(1285) 117:(1286) 199
-267 71 180 -148
-572 -148
58 -222 -668
-662
511:(27) 525:(26) 679:(503) 674:(506) 676:(505) 680:(502) 677:(504) -1556 1089:(718) 990:(1310) 100:(1342) 136:(1287)
-417
-382 -831 -1688 -267 -668

506:(28) 673:(507) 671:(508) 96:(1324) 126:(1341)
77 -668 188
-412 -273 -222 -367 -453
-426 -36 -668 461
499:(29) 670:(509) 667:(511) 982:(512) -222 668:(510) 1073:(719) -105 1298 985:(1282) 115:(1325)
-267 -109 -222 -121 -122 498 35
-898 559 -49

481:(31) 490:(30) 978:(515) 981:(513) 973:(518) 976:(516) 979:(514) 975:(517) 44:(1306) 132:(1326)
-780 -426 539 559 125 -578
-15 461
650:(34) 656:(33) 666:(32) 642:(35) 972:(519) 1065:(720) 989:(1311) -453 986:(1281)
-212 58 -545 593 593
530 125 -823 747 59 -217 -217

636:(36) 618:(38) 632:(37) 967:(522) -267 970:(520) 966:(523) 969:(521) 1063:(724) 1094:(722) 1064:(721) 1109:(723) 105:(1327)
-67 336 -141 -823
-212 -289 496
98 -642
604:(40) -134 596:(41) 276 607:(39) 964:(524) 963:(525) 264 -52
-15 -661 98 -475 103 -160 -224

-382 -38 209
-1158 -160 -310 -1649 188

586:(44) 570:(42) 578:(45) 576:(43) 961:(526) 47:(1279) 37:(1305)
480 -224 1409
59 -43
129 103 -369 580

614:(46) 563:(47) 558:(48) 551:(49) 957:(528) 960:(527) 1160:(1253) 46:(1303) 188
-442 -30 -283

-152 129 -43
530 -926 104 -693

521:(53) 544:(50) 536:(51) 529:(52) 514:(54) 103 1068:(725) 40:(1304) 987:(1280) 995:(1275)
-442 1524 -310
-219 103 -224 59
336 585 -642 103 198 -1000
508:(55) 504:(56) 501:(57) 497:(58) 956:(529) 1102:(726) 1066:(727) 306 42:(1278)
123 98 -215 580 102
-51 -559
483:(61) -3 488:(60) 493:(59) 953:(531) 954:(530) 1062:(728) 1010:(1274)
336
-136 -219 37 1452 -1895

476:(63) 664:(64) 479:(62) 661:(65) 658:(66) 951:(532) 38:(1302)
359 -442 -260 90 -369 1452 -1649 -1183
-661 258 336 359 711 -200 120

591:(68) 647:(69) 602:(70) 655:(67) 950:(533) -283 992:(1314) 996:(1273)
336 711 -51 -219 -559 -595

198 -212
-491 1508 -693

611:(74) 639:(71) 625:(76) 629:(73) 104 617:(77) 622:(75) 613:(72) 1067:(729) 997:(1271) 1011:(1272)
-152 -27 -27 34 -951 -693 -693
258 1194 101 -67

637:(79) 606:(80) -260 595:(82) 646:(81) 634:(78) 1452 1108:(730) 41:(1301) 1008:(1270) 993:(1313)
1194 -337 -1183 -442
-1047 1194 -442 603

98 495:(85) 569:(84) 487:(86) 653:(83) 1061:(732) 1164:(731) 1169:(733) 43:(1277) 796
-492 445
-152
227 -447 1508 -404 -404
585:(87) 593:(88) -30 1161:(735) -1183 1162:(734) 998:(1269)
-569 101 601 -492 695
62 1508
332 -912 -569 -22 377 -555

1222:(1) 485:(89) 581:(90) 1060:(736)
359
489 349 -404
-219 -59 -1281

571:(91) 631:(92) 561:(95) 565:(94) 623:(93) 1163:(737) -404 1166:(738) 1165:(739)
1072
349
482
-1281
553:(97) 556:(96) 1168:(740) 796
-89 1418 -1281 -2608 -555
209 -569 -569

549:(98) 546:(99) 542:(100) 445
-161 -86 445
1072 -569 482 -22 349 -2608 -926

538:(101) 1170:(741) 1058:(743) 1059:(742)
-216
287 -1281
523:(105) 534:(102) 527:(104) 531:(103)
332 -157 -188 565

601
1194 -26 88 88 -3000 -216

1229:(2) 512:(108) 516:(107) 519:(106) 1057:(744)
-569 1277
1037 1418
510:(109) 509:(110) -704 507:(111) 1056:(745) 999:(1267)
-26 46 46 1418
1117 -14 -692 -569 184

1220:(3) 1230:(4) 502:(114) 503:(113) 498:(116) 505:(112) 500:(115) 1055:(746) 1167:(747) 1009:(1268)
-171 1418
209
1117 -8 -210 320

489:(120) 492:(119) 486:(121) 496:(117) 494:(118) 1418 1175:(1513)
-634 -85 1277 111 1094 565 -993 1572

-409
-59 326 565
1224:(5) 484:(122) 994:(1312)
704 430 -112 -210 405 177 3000
-1277 1418
704 -409 -85 290 1094 1418 -231

1219:(6) 1215:(7) 1235:(8) 475:(127) 478:(125) 482:(123) 480:(124) 1094 477:(126) 1174:(1514) 320
443 704
-26 334 1094
208 -171
-85 -161 660:(131) 665:(128) 663:(129) 662:(130) 1054:(748)
-210
290 -112 -409
287 119
1742 405 405 -409

657:(133) 659:(132) 1053:(749)
-210 -323
-662 1742
443 -409 654:(135) 651:(136) 648:(138) 649:(137) -47 577:(134) 1007:(1266)
2360
57 366 -578
1742 645:(139)
-1172
643:(140) 640:(142) 641:(141)
1227:(10) 1232:(9) 1052:(750) 1000:(1265) -452
-1096
417 1221:(11) -1096 430 601:(143) 1002:(1261)
-76 -1537 366 1200
1218:(12) 1216:(13) 633:(144) 1051:(751) 143
-169 143
-662 -112 128

1214:(14) 584:(147) 610:(145) 628:(146) 597:(148) 1001:(1262)
-112
351 -251 -220 -112 143
35 -305
443 359 612:(149) 615:(150) 1004:(1260)
-112 151
-610 214
1213:(15) 1050:(752) 1200 391
214 964 970
627:(151) 626:(152) 1005:(1259)

-944 -755 214 -187
619:(153) 616:(154) 1006:(1258)

-305
-463
-112 -220
1236:(16)
214 -256 -711

-610
635:(155) -610 151 1049:(753) 1003:(1257)
-944 -610 214
207 638:(157) 609:(156) -169
-256
122 -122
1234:(17) 605:(160) 600:(158) 608:(159)
214
599:(163) 603:(161) 598:(164) 644:(162) 214 964
-112 231 20
231 -117
1233:(18) 590:(165) 652:(166)
32 -380 -967
98
-286 565
1228:(20) 1231:(19) 1328 20
-354
594:(167) 1048:(754)
568:(169) 573:(171) 592:(168) 574:(170)
-967
497
-1012 -117 575:(172)
-122
-1012 947
-380
1071 -720
583:(174) 580:(173) 565
-205
-166
1226:(21)
497 35 -720
589:(176) 587:(175) 1047:(755)
-91 -1889
1225:(22) 497 567:(178) 579:(177)
788 -2834
582:(179) 1046:(756)
-205
91 -1596 852
1223:(23) 588:(181) 572:(182) 491:(180)
2414
494 -720
-1596 -2834
1045:(757) 1044:(758)
252
-716 -186
751 -354
-1007
1071 621:(184) 630:(185) 620:(183) 1043:(760)
130 -371 252

-716 1041:(762) 1042:(761)
564:(188) 566:(187) 624:(186) 562:(189)

231 140
751
-490 -1662 -414

560:(190) -431
231 -716
1217:(24) 559:(191)
788
557:(192) 1040:(763) 1039:(764)
-252 -1662 -414
491 555:(193) 1038:(765)

130
788
554:(194) 832 -414
481
552:(195)
550:(196) 548:(197) 1037:(766)
272
649
545:(199) 547:(198)
-233
-358
130 -233
140 543:(200)
194 -233
-1110
539:(202) 541:(201)
537:(203)
-982 281
533:(205) 535:(204)
13
-443
-106
-21
532:(206)
231
530:(207)
85
528:(208) 526:(209)
-641 -1723 1182
524:(210) 522:(211)
520:(212) -1723
517:(214) 518:(213)
-1110
-641
-641 1277
515:(215)
-86
513:(216)
-862
1179:(1251)
Figure 6.3: European high voltage transmission grid representation according [121]
To limit the calculation time, only the Spanish and French transmission grids
are used consisting of 523 nodes (figure 6.4). The neighbouring transmission
grids of Portugal, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium and UK have been
represented using equivalent injections on border nodes. After calculating the
connection capability (Section 3.4.4), a total of 34 candidate nodes have been
selected. Additionally, the geographic location is taken into account during the
selection of candidate nodes. Candidate nodes are geographically distributed
in both countries (figure 6.4). Out of the 34 candidate nodes, 18 are situated
in France whereas 16 nodes are located in Spain.
For the calculation of maximum power injection (import in one node) and
IDENTIFICATION OF STRONG NODES 111
27 30
26
34
31
28
32
18
33 24
29
17 19
25
9 8 23
7 22 20
21
11 12 15
13
14
4 1
6 2
16
3
5
10
Figure 6.4: Structure of the used network. Circles indicate chosen candidate nodes [121]
maximum power absorption (export from one node) capabilities, different load
profiles have been used derived from [101]. Three different load profiles have
randomly been applied to each load centre. At nodes containing wind and
solar generators, according generation profiles have been applied to account
for stochastic renewable generation. After application of the calculation
methodology described in chapter 3, maximum power injection and absorption
capabilities are obtained (figure 6.5).
Figure 6.5 shows that nodes 26, 28 and 31 have the highest power import
capacity. Nodes 6, 10, 26, 28 have the highest power export capacity. The
spread of the import and export capacity is different for each node. The most
favourable nodes for new connections are the ones, where import and export
capacity is high and their spread small. This means that these nodes are less
sensitive to volatility of power flows. The figure shows that nodes with a high
import capacity also have a high export capacity. In general, the import and
export capacity depend on the geographic spread of generation and load centres
as well as how well candidate nodes are interconnected. In this specific case, the
geographic spread of generation and load centres is more homogeneous so that
import and export capacities mainly depend on the level of interconnection.
6.3 Possible future expansion plans
This section shows possible future grid expansion options to establish 30 GW

of additional interconnection capacity between Spain and France. Other
optimization parameters are:
• The total interconnection power is established in four investment time

steps, t = [0 10 20 30] years
• The cumulative interconnection capacity per time step is Ptinter =
[8 16 23 30] GW
• The new connections can be built in multiples of 500 MW
• 400 kV is used for AC transmission, ±320 kV is used fro DC transmission
• DC transmission is assumed to be with VSC technology
• The used discount rate is 3% per year, without accounting for inflation
and price increase of equipment
Figure 6.6 shows the optimal investment plan if the maximum power rating per
path is restricted to 3 GW. In the first investment time step, strong candidate
nodes in southern France and northern Spain are connected first. Four out
of five new transmission lines are established using HVAC technology. The
longest line section connecting node 15 with node 33 is established using HVDC
technology. With advancing time, the total length of new built connections
increase as the power injection capability of nodes near the border do not allow
the connection of new lines. In the final investment period, line sections up to
1119 km are realised connecting south-east of France with central Spain, using
a transmission capacity of 3000 MW. In total, 1301 km, 1530 km, 1658 km and
2835 km of new lines are built at each investment time period.
Under the taken assumptions, most interconnections are established using
overhead line technology. During the entire planning horizon, only one
POSSIBLE FUTURE EXPANSION PLANS 113
11
10
7
MPIC in GW
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 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
BUS number
(a) Maximum power import capabilities of candidate nodes
-1
-2
-3
-4
MPIC in GW
-5
-6
-7
-8
-9
-10
1 2 3 4 5
-11
.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
BUS number
(b) Maximum power
1 export capabilities2of candidate nodes 3 4 5
Figure 6.5: Maximum power import and export capabilities of candidate nodes.
underground cable connection appears using HVDC technology (figure 6.6b).

HVAC technology is preferred to connect nodes close to each other, whereas for
longer distances HVDC technology is used. As HVDC overhead lines require
less conductors, the cost per km of HVDC overhead line is less than HVAC
overhead lines. Out of 17 new connections built over the entire planning time
horizon, 9 are established in HVDC technology. With increasing transmission
distance, cost savings of using HVDC overhead lines outweighs costs of HVDC
converters making HVDC economically more feasible. The transmission losses
are not taken into account during the optimization process.
The total net present value of the grid expansion equals 8223.6 Me. If the costs
are broken down by time step, we can see that in the four steps investments
worth 1894.8 Me, 2137.5.7 Me, 1863.9 Me, 2327.4 Me are required. In the
obtained investment plan, the net present value of the total investment is spread
approximately equally over the planning horizon. On one hand, distances of
connections increase with time, on the other hand, investments per km of line
decrease due to depreciation. The chosen discount rate of 3% causes that the
net present value of investments in year 30 are only worth 40% of year 0.
Figure 6.7 shows the optimal investment plan if links with a maximum power
rating of 5 GW can be established. In this case, the number of necessary links
is reduced to 15 instead of 17. Figure 6.7 further shows that the majority of
long links are built in South-East France and North-East Spain, whereas in
the previous case also long connections between Western France and Western
Spain were built. This is due to the reason that the larger generation and
load centres are situated in South-East France (Lyon area) and North-East
Spain (Catalonia). If links with higher capacities can be built, the potential
of power injection and absorption in these nodes can be utilized better. Using
links with lower capacities mean that other connection points must be found
in order to achieve the desired interconnection power. Table 6.1 shows that
the total investment cost is decreased if transmission links with 5 GW are
used. The total investments decrease to 7.408 Ge equal to a cost saving
of 9.91%. Table 6.1 further shows that the required length of new lines is
approximately 2000 km less if links with 5 GW are used. This has a positive
impact on maintenance decreasing operational costs. With taken assumptions,
only overhead lines are used in this configuration. As the proposed line sections
are shorter, HVAC technology is preferred more often. Out of 15 connections
built over the planning horizon, 10 are established in HVAC technology.
Although any link can be built with 5 GW, only one transmission link is
actually built with a capacity of 5 GW connecting nodes 4 and 33 via an
HVDC overhead line. The reason is that the use of larger links is restricted
by the maximum power injection capability of candidate nodes. In case larger
links would be connected, overload situations in the underlying network may
POSSIBLE FUTURE EXPANSION PLANS 115
2730 26 2730 26
34 34
31 31
32 28 32 28
18 24 29 18 24 29
33 33
17 19 17 19
7 9 8 23 20 21 25 7 9 8 23 20 21 25
22 22
11 11
12 13 12 13
15
14 15
14
6 1 6 1
16 43 2 16 43 2
5 5
10 10
(a) Optimal grid expansion t = 0 years (b) Optimal grid expansion t = 10 years
2730 26 2730 26
34 34
31 31
32 28 32 28
18 24 29 18 24 29
33 33
17 19 17 19
7 9 8 23 20 21 25 7 9 8 23 20 21 25
22 22
11 11
12 13 12 13
15
14 15
14
6 6
16 43 21 16 43 21
5 5
10 10
(c) Optimal grid expansion t = 20 years (d) Optimal grid expansion t = 30 years
Figure 6.6: Optimal investment plan for K = 3 GW . Red colour indicates HVAC, white
colour indicates HVDC. Solid lines indicate underground cables, circles indicate overhead
lines
occur. Table 6.1 shows that a further increase in maximum link capacities does
not improve the optimal solution. Even if links with a capacity of 8 GW are
allowed, the economically best solution is still achieved with the investment
plan using 5 GW.
Table 6.1 illustrates that the total investment costs are significantly increased if
the use multi-terminal HVDC is delayed. If the use of multi-terminal HVDC is
2730 26 2730 26
34 34
31 31
32 28 32 28
18 24 29 18 24 29
33 33
17 19 17 19
7 9 8 23 20 21 25 7 9 8 23 20 21 25
22 22
11 11
12 13 12 13
15
14 15
14
6 1 6 1
16 43 2 16 43 2
5 5
10 10
2730 26 2730 26
34 34
31 31
32 28 32 28
18 24 29 18 24 29
33 33
17 19 17 19
7 9 8 23 20 21 25 7 9 8 23 20 21 25
22 22
11 11
12 13 12 13
15
14 15
14
6 1 6 1
16 43 2 16 43 2
5 5
10 10
Figure 6.7: Optimal investment plan for K = 5 GW . Red colour indicates HVAC, white
colour indicates HVDC. Solid lines indicate underground cables, circles indicate overhead
lines
delayed for 20 years, the obtained optimal solution using a maximum capacity
of 8 GW performs better than a maximum capacity of 5 GW. In that case,
a solution is found where a link of 6.5 GW is established between nodes 10
and 31 using HVDC overhead line technology (figure 6.8). This particular
link connects the region of Lyon with the region of Madrid and is longer than
1400 km. Such a long distance, high capacity link can be considered as part of
CONCLUSIONS 117
Table 6.1: Comparison of different maximum power ratings per path
K Ctot [Me] ltot [km]

tHV DC =0 tHV DC =10 tHV DC =20 tHV DC =0 tHV DC =10 tHV DC =20
3000 GW
ae = 2,ap = 1 8223.6 10920 11387 7054 9517 8939
ae = 1,ap = 1 7898.3 8010.4 8179.2 6789 6846 7334
ae = 1,ap = 2 8220.2 8220.2 8535.6 7376 7376 7034
5000 GW
ae = 2,ap = 1 7408.3 7628.9 8446 5098 4840 5846
ae = 1,ap = 1 7467.8 7570.1 7755.6 5332 4688 5209
ae = 1,ap = 2 7547.8 7547.8 7755.0 4913 4913 5291
8000 GW
ae = 2,ap = 1 7408.3 7628.9 8061 5098 4840 4847
ae = 1,ap = 1 7467.8 7570.1 7755.6 5332 4688 5209
ae = 1,ap = 2 7547.8 7547.8 7755.0 4913 4913 5291
an overlay grid. If the use of multi-terminal HVDC is delayed more than 20

years, the optimization algorithm cannot find any feasible solution under the
taken assumptions.
The optimal solution obtained with transmission paths of 5 GW contains 4
HVAC connections established in the first time step of the planning horizon
between nodes 12 and 17, 12 and 23, 14 and 20, 13 and 22 (figure 6.7a). In case
these connections cannot be built in the first 10 years, it becomes economically
more feasible to choose another investment plan (figure 6.9). In this option,
the connections between nodes 12 and 17, 14 and 20, 13 and 22 are established
in the second step of the planning horizon. The connection between nodes 12
and 23 is not established at all. The total net present value of investments
considering line delays equals 7514.8 Me, which is 1.01% higher than the best
obtained solution without delay. In the optimal investment plan including line
delays, 13 transmission paths are established instead of 15. The total length of
new built lines is approximately 300 km less. In this case, a detailed analysis
of expected transmission losses and maintenance costs should be conducted
in order to assess potential cost savings due to shorter lines versus the 1.01%
investment cost increase.
6.4 Conclusions
This chapter shows that the developed methodology can be applied to larger
systems. In case sufficient geographic, network and generation information is
available, the described building blocks of the developed methodology can be
applied in order to obtain a stepwise, long term investment plan.
2730 26 2730 26
34 34
31 31
32 28 32 28
24 29 18 24 29
18 33 33
17 17 19
7 23 19
20 21 25 7 23 20 21 25
9 8 22 9 8 22
11 11
12 13 12 13
15
14 15
14
6 1 6 1
16 43 2 16 43 2
5 5
10 10
2730 26 2730 26
34 34
31 31
32 28 32 28
24 29 18 24 29
18 33 33
17 17 19
7 23 19
20 21 25 7 23 20 21 25
9 8 22 9 8 22
11 11
12 13 12 13
15
14 15
14
6 1 6 1
16 43 2 16 43 2
5 5
10 10
Figure 6.8: Optimal investment plan for K = 8 GW and multi-terminal HVDC delayed for
20 years. Red colour indicates HVAC, white colour indicates HVDC. Solid lines indicate
underground cables, circles indicate overhead lines
Using the available data and under the taken assumptions, the calculation
results show that in the early time steps links with shorter distances and lower
power ratings are preferred as they are cheaper. The more expensive, long
distance, high power and therefore more expensive links are established at the
later stages of the planning horizon. In the considered case study, some of
these links can be considered as part of a possible overlay grid. They reach
CONCLUSIONS 119
2730 26 2730 26
34 34
31 31
32 28 32 28
18 24 29 18 24 29
33 33
17 19 17 19
7 9 8 23 20 21 25 7 9 8 23 20 21 25
22 22
11 11
12 13 12 13
15
14 15
14
6 1 6 1
16 43 2 16 43 2
5 5
10 10
2730 26 2730 26
34 34
31 31
32 28 32 28
24 29 18 24 29
18 33 33
17 17 19
7 23 19
20 21 25 7 23 20 21 25
9 8 22 9 8 22
11 11
12 13 12 13
15 15
14
6 14 6
16 43 2
1 16 43 21
5 5
10 10
Figure 6.9: Optimal investment plan for K = 5 GW in case of line delays. Red colour
indicates HVAC, white colour indicates HVDC. Solid lines indicate underground cables,
circles indicate overhead lines
over several hundred kilometres and directly connect strong grid nodes as the
power import capability of nodes close to borders is used in the earlier stages
of the planning horizon. For the long distance and high power transmission
links, mostly HVDC technology is preferred as the cost savings of cheaper
transmission lines outweigh the additional HVDC converter costs.
Cost savings can be achieved using transmission links with higher capacities.
Nevertheless, the underlying transmission grid sets limits to the maximum

capacity of such links. Therefore, it is important to consider several scenarios
regarding link capacity in order to determine the economically most beneficial
option. In the considered case study, significant investment cost savings
can be achieved if multi-terminal HVDC operation becomes technically and
commercially feasible. Therefore, issues related to protection and control have
to be solved in a cost effective way.
It should be noted that obtained results strongly depend on used data. It is
important to perform sensitivity analysis on the used data and assumptions.
Costs of different investment plans may be close to each other although the
obtained grid topologies are very different. In such cases, the operational costs
such as transmission system losses and maintenance costs can be the decisive.
Chapter 7
Conclusions and future work
In three words I can sum up everything I’ve learned about life: it goes on. -
Robert Frost
7.1 Overview and overall conclusions
In this thesis, building blocks of a transmission system expansion methodology

have been developed which can separately be implemented into existing
planning tools or used as a whole. The developed methodology is suitable for
long term transmission expansion studies and delivers optimal grid investment
plans. The methodology is developed in a modular way allowing user
interaction such that it can be integrated in existing planning methodologies.
In order to obtain reliable investment plans, basic assumptions and used data
have to be chosen carefully. It is difficult to reliably estimate future power
flows, location of generation, cost information and possible delays due to a
large number of uncertainties. It is important to analyse a large number of
scenarios and perform case studies considering these parameters and by doing
so identifying investment options satisfying most of these scenarios. This way,
the risk for future investments can be minimized.
In Chapter 3, a network abstraction algorithm using probabilistic optimal
load flow has been provided. The methodology allows to identify strong grid
nodes and to quantify the amount possible imports and exports in these nodes.
Generally, transmission system operators have to provide nodal injection
capacities to their customers. Using the proposed abstraction methodology,
121
122 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
transmission system operators can provide these capacities taking into account
volatile power flows due to renewable power generation. The developed
methodology makes use of cost information of existing generators. In case
sufficient data is available, generation companies can use this methodology to
determine the maximum size of their new investments as well as expected future
revenues. This way more reliable cost benefit analysis can be conducted.
In this work, the network abstraction methodology is used as input to optimize
future transmission system investments. It is important to investigate different
technology options in terms of economics, social and environmental impact in
long term, in order to give recommendations to decision makers, transmission
system operators and technology providers and minimize investment risks.
Chapter 4 provides an optimization methodology for transmission system
investments. The optimization methodology allows the consideration of spatial
aspects of transmission planning in order to assess the economics, social and
environmental impact with sufficient accuracy. The choice of the technology
and size of investments and the resulting investment costs depend strongly
on spatial aspects. By quantifying area related costs, recommendations for
technology development can be provided enabling optimal transmission system
design and maximizing social welfare.
Each new investment influences future investments to follow. Chapter 5 shows
a possibility to include investment time points into the optimization problem.
This way, a sequential investment plan is obtained, delivering the optimal time
period for each new investment. This way, temporal effects of line delays,
capital availability and technology maturity are analysed. In order to obtain
more robust solutions, the transmission investment problem and market model
responsible for the generation planning problem should be solved iteratively as
shown in Chapter 2.
Delays in transmission system investment projects can cause significant
additional costs. The case studies provided in Chapter 6 show that some line
delays can be compensated by changing the order of investments. Nevertheless,
the calculations show that investments in certain transmission paths may
become obsolete in case the order of investments is changed. Using the
developed methodology different optimal investment plans can be analysed
considering possible delays. This way, connection paths affected most by
delays can be identified. Beyond that the point of no return where a certain
connection becomes economically less feasible than other connection paths can
be determined. This information can be used as an incentive to advise decision
makers, accelerate permission procedures or to propose another investment
plan in case these delays cannot be avoided.
Chapter 6 shows how the developed methodology can be used as a standalone
FUTURE RESEARCH 123
tool and applied to larger networks in order to conduct long term studies
for large scale transmission expansion. As the performed calculations are
based on public available data the results can only be considered as indicative.
Nevertheless, some main patterns in the results can be observed and some
qualitative conclusions can be drawn.
The analysed case study in Chapter 6 shows that it is economically more
feasible to establish first shorter connections between border nodes to increase
the transmission capacity between two zones as these connections are cheaper.
Longer and more expensive links are proposed in later stages of the planning
horizon when no more additional power can be injected in border nodes. These
more expensive links are postponed as much as possible due to economic
reasons. Although larger links are economically more attractive in later
stages, the underlying networks are not always able to support such large
links, limiting the maximum capacity of such links. This sets limits to the
maximum size of links to be built. In the obtained solutions, both HVAC
and HVDC technology is used to achieve the desired interconnection power.
The calculation results show that HVDC technology becomes more interesting
for high power long distance transmission links and underground connections.
In the analysed cases significant cost savings could be achieved using multi-
terminal or meshed HVDC configurations. This means that in the future, issues
related to protection and control of meshed HVDC systems need to be solved
in a cost effective way in order to make advantage of these cost savings.
7.2 Future Research
In this thesis, the lumpiness of transmission system investments has been

taken into account using an integer formulation of the optimization problem.
Available optimization solvers for integer variables face problems in terms of
convergence and computational efficiency, especially for large scale problems.
In order to achieve numerically more robust results and to handle larger
problems, exiting optimization solvers need to be improved.
In case future power flows can be estimated using scenario based or probabilistic
approaches, location and size of necessary investments can be determined
taking into account several different aspects. In such cases, the investment risk
can be reduced by increasing the number of scenarios or using more accurate
probabilistic calculations in order to account for volatility of future power flows.
Since the liberalization of electricity markets, generation and transmission
investments are carried out by different entities. In order to obtain more robust
solutions and better convergence of transmission and generation investments,
124 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
the interaction between them should be modelled in greater detail. One of

the largest investment risks for transmission system operators is delay or
cancellation of planned generation investments leading to stranded investments.
Current probabilistic criteria only assess volatility of flows based on planned
investments as a result of future energy scenarios. Nevertheless, the financial
uncertainty of specific planned investments need to be modelled in greater detail
in order to avoid stranded investments in both generation and transmission
assets.
Although transmission is still a regulated business, transmission system
operators have to find the necessary capital for investments on the capital
market. In case of delayed or cancelled generation investments, stranded
transmission system investments may occur, decreasing social welfare and
affecting finances of transmission system operators. In order to reduce or
at least quantify this additional risk, probabilistic planning methodologies
need to be improved further. The financial uncertainty of planned generation
investments should be included in transmission investment models in order to
justify specific transmission investments with a certain degree of certainty.
Future research should be conducted in order to develop a methodology, which
delivers a stepwise development plan including confidence intervals for proposed
investments. This way, decision makers can choose between cheaper options
with higher investment risks versus more expensive solution with lower risk.
Another important aspect which should be included in future planning tools
is the implementation of probabilistic security criteria. As the flexibility
in transmission grids is increasing due to use of phase-shifting transformers,
FACTS devices and HVDC links, the future transmission grid may not
necessarily be designed for N-1 cases with low probability of occurrence. The
welfare loss due to curtailment may be less than the required investments to
design the network N-1 secure, especially in case of greater demand flexibility.
This way, over-investments can be avoided without compromising security of
supply.
In close future transmission system operators will need to invest in the
replacement of existing assets as they are approaching the end of their lifetime.
In a future transmission planning methodology using probabilistic approaches
to model investment uncertainty and probabilistic security criteria, also the
age of existing assets and their expected lifetimes should be taken into account
in order to find the best expansion solution combining replacement strategies
and new investments.
The regulatory framework influences future investment decisions, especially
for cross-border investments. In case the regulatory schemes are not aligned,
FUTURE RESEARCH 125
investments can result in sub-optima or in the worst case in cancellation.

In future, technical transmission system planning criteria and the design
of regulatory frameworks need to be aligned such that a technically and
economically optimal system design and a regulatory framework to support
such a design can be achieved.
Appendix A
Network data of modified

IEEE 24 Bus Test system for
MPIC calculation
Figure A.1: The IEEE 24 bus test system
127
128 NETWORK DATA OF MODIFIED IEEE 24 BUS TEST SYSTEM FOR MPIC CALCULATION
Table A.1: Bus data
Bus number P Q V
MW MVar kV
1 540 22 400
2 485 20 400
3 900 37 400
4 370 15 400
5 355 14 400
6 680 28 400
7 625 25 400
8 855 35 400
9 875 36 400
10 975 40 400
11 0 0 400
12 0 0 400
13 1325 54 400
14 970 39 400
15 1585 64 400
16 500 20 400
17 0 0 400
18 1665 68 400
19 905 37 400
20 640 26 400
21 0 0 400
22 0 0 400
23 0 0 400
24 0 0 400
NETWORK DATA OF MODIFIED IEEE 24 BUS TEST SYSTEM FOR MPIC CALCULATION 129
Table A.2: Generator Data
Bus number Pmax Qmax Pmin Qmin

MW MVar MW MVar
1 160 160 0 -160
1 160 160 0 -160
1 608 608 0 -608
1 608 608 0 -608
2 160 160 0 -160
2 160 160 0 -160
2 608 608 0 -608
2 608 608 0 -608
7 800 800 0 -800
7 800 800 0 -800
7 800 800 0 -800
13 1576 1576 0 -1576
13 1576 1576 0 -1576
13 1576 1576 0 -1576
15 96 96 0 -96
15 96 96 0 -96
15 96 96 0 -96
15 96 96 0 -96
15 96 96 0 -96
15 1240 1240 0 -1240
16 1240 1240 0 -1240
18 3200 3200 0 -3200
21 3200 3200 0 -3200
22 400 400 0 -400
22 400 400 0 -400
22 400 400 0 -400
22 400 400 0 -400
22 400 400 0 -400
22 400 400 0 -400
23 1240 1240 0 -1240
23 1240 1240 0 -1240
23 2800 2800 0 -2800
130 NETWORK DATA OF MODIFIED IEEE 24 BUS TEST SYSTEM FOR MPIC CALCULATION
Table A.3: Generator Cost Data
Start up cost C2 C1 C0
e e/ MW2 e/MW e
1500 0 130 400,6849
1500 0 130 400,6849
1500 0,014142 16,0811 212,3076
1500 0,014142 16,0811 212,3076
1500 0 130 400,6849
1500 0 130 400,6849
1500 0,014142 16,0811 212,3076
1500 0,014142 16,0811 212,3076
1500 0,052672 43,6615 781,521
1500 0,052672 43,6615 781,521
1500 0,052672 43,6615 781,521
1500 0,00717 48,5804 832,7575
1500 0,00717 48,5804 832,7575
1500 0,00717 48,5804 832,7575
1500 0,328412 56,564 86,3852
1500 0,328412 56,564 86,3852
1500 0,328412 56,5647 86,3852
1500 0,328412 56,564 86,3852
1500 0,328412 56,564 86,3852
1500 0,008342 12,3883 382,2391
1500 0,008342 12,3883 382,2391
1500 0,000213 4,42317 395,3749
0 0 0,001 0,001
1500 0 0,001 0,001
1500 0 0,001 0,001
1500 0 0,001 0,001
1500 0 0,001 0,001
1500 0 0,001 0,001
1500 0 0,001 0,001
1500 0,008342 12,3883 382,2391
1500 0,008342 12,3883 382,2391
1500 0,004895 11,8495 665,1094
NETWORK DATA OF MODIFIED IEEE 24 BUS TEST SYSTEM FOR MPIC CALCULATION 131
Table A.4: Branch Data
From bus To bus R X B Pmax

p.u. p.u. p.u. MW
1 2 0,0026 0,0139 0,4611 2000
1 3 0,0546 0,2112 0,0572 2000
1 5 0,0218 0,0845 0,0229 2000
2 4 0,0328 0,1267 0,0343 2000
2 6 0,0497 0,192 0,052 2000
3 9 0,0308 0,119 0,0322 2000
3 24 0,0023 0,0839 0 750
4 9 0,0268 0,1037 0,0281 2000
5 10 0,0228 0,0883 0,0239 2000
6 10 0,0139 0,0605 2,459 2000
7 8 0,0159 0,0614 0,0166 2500
8 9 0,0427 0,1651 0,0447 2000
8 10 0,0427 0,1651 0,0447 2000
9 11 0,0023 0,0839 0 750
9 12 0,0023 0,0839 0 750
10 11 0,0023 0,0839 0 750
10 12 0,0023 0,0839 0 750
11 13 0,0061 0,0476 0,0999 750
11 14 0,0054 0,0418 0,0879 750
12 13 0,0061 0,0476 0,0999 750
12 23 0,0124 0,0966 0,203 750
13 23 0,0111 0,0865 0,1818 2500
14 16 0,01 0,0778 0,0409 1250
14 16 0,01 0,0778 0,0409 1250
15 16 0,0022 0,0173 0,0364 2500
15 21 0,0063 0,049 0,103 2500
15 21 0,0063 0,049 0,103 2500
15 24 0,0067 0,0519 0,1091 750
16 17 0,0033 0,0259 0,0545 2500
16 19 0,003 0,0231 0,0485 2500
17 18 0,0018 0,0144 0,0303 2500
17 22 0,0135 0,1053 0,2212 2500
18 21 0,0033 0,0259 0,0545 2500
18 21 0,0033 0,0259 0,0545 2500
19 20 0,0051 0,0396 0,0833 2500
19 20 0,0051 0,0396 0,0833 2500
20 23 0,0028 0,0216 0,0455 2500
20 23 0,0028 0,0216 0,0455 2500
21 22 0,0087 0,0678 0,1424 2500
Appendix B
Spatial weights for

installation costs of
equipment
Table B.1: Spacial weights for elevation
Level AC OHL AC UGC DC OHL DC UGC

Level 1 1 1 1 1
Level 2 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.1
Level 3 1.6 1.2 1.6 1.2
Level 4 1.9 1.3 1.9 1.3
Level 5 2.2 1.4 2.2 1.4
Level 6 2.5 1.5 2.5 1.5
Level 7 2.8 1.6 2.8 1.6
Level 8 3.1 1.7 3.1 1.7
Level 9 3.4 1.8 3.4 1.8
Level 10 3.7 2 3.7 2
Level 11 4 2.1 4 2.1
Offshore 40 0.9 40 0.9
133
134 SPATIAL WEIGHTS FOR INSTALLATION COSTS OF EQUIPMENT
Table B.2: Spacial weights for population
Level AC OHL AC UGC DC OHL DC UGC

Level 1 1 1 1 1
Level 2 2 1.1 2 1.1
Level 3 3 1.2 3 1.2
Level 4 4 1.3 4 1.3
Level 5 5 1.4 5 1.4
Level 6 6 1.5 6 1.5
Level 7 7 1.6 7 1.6
Level 8 8 1.7 8 1.7
Level 9 9 1.8 9 1.8
Level 10 10 2 10 2
Offshore 40 0.9 40 0.9
Appendix C
Developed Software
In this section the developed software code of the illustrated transmission

system investment optimization method is briefly described. Additionally, the
description of a software tool to optimize offshore wind farm connections is
provided.
C.1 Pesudo-code: Calculation of maximum power

injection capabilities
This section provides the pseudo-code for the calculation routine of maximum
power injection capabilities.
Process grid data
→ Build data structure in Matpower format, containing bus, branch, generator and generator
cost information
→ Add possible HVDC links and PSTs
Process generation and load data
→ Assign a load profile to each bus
→ Assign a generation profile to each renewable generator
Determine Gaussian Components or samples for Monte Carlo
Simulation
→ Determine Gaussian components for load and generation profile of each bus
→ Reduce the number of components if possible
Calculate connection capacity and define candidate nodes
Calculate LODF for N-1 calculation
135
136 DEVELOPED SOFTWARE
Calculate MPIC - injection

→ for each cadidate node
→→ for each sample of Gaussian component
→→→ solve OPF
→→→ determine important N-1 cases using LODF
→→→→ deactivate each important element
→→→→ recalculate OPF
→→→ save smallest MPIC-value for this sample
Calculate MPIC - absorption
→ for each cadidate node
→→ for each sample of Gaussian component
→→→ solve OPF
→→→ determine important N-1 cases using LODF
→→→→ deactivate each important element
→→→→ recalculate OPF
→→→ save smallest MPIC-value for this sample
Calculate ∆ MPIC
→ for i to number of candidate nodes
→→ for j to number of candidate nodes
→→→ for different injection values of node i
→→→→ fix injection of node i
→→→→ calculate MPIC - injection of node j
→→→ for different injection values of node i
→→→→ calculate MPIC - absorption of node j
→→→ for different absorption values of node i
→→→→ calculate MPIC - injection of node j
→→→ for different absorption values of node i
→→→→ calculate MPIC - absorption of node j
C.2 Pesudo-code: Investment optimization
This section provides the pseudo-code for the calculation routine of investment
optimization.
Import geographic data
→ Read population density map
→ Read elevation map
TOOL TO OPTIMIZE OFFSHORE WIND FARM CONNECTIONS 137
→ Define geographic positions of candidate nodes

Define spatial costs
→ For each area of population density define weights for the four technology options
Import MPIC data
→ Import MPIC and ∆ MPIC matrices
→ Scale and rearrange matrices
Start optimization block
→ Calculate average costs
→→ For each possible branch
→→→ For power rating of each technology and the maximum power per path
→→→→ Run optimal routing algorithm with low resolution C.2.1
→ Run MILP optimization
→ Until convergence
→→ Run optimal routing algorithm with desired resolution C.2.1
→→ Update average costs
→→ Run MILP optimization
Rank solutions
Plot optimal investment plan
C.2.1 Pseudo code: Optimal routing
Discretise topography map

Assign spatial weights
→ For each technology option
→→ Calculate area dependent costs for each edge of graph
Connect four technology maps
→ Add substation costs or HVDC converters between corresponding nodes
Select algorithm: Dijkstra or A*
Run shortest path algorithm
C.3 Tool to optimize offshore wind farm connec-

tions
This software tool is developed to optimize transmission system investments for

multiple offshore wind farms [123,124]. The tool uses rule based heuristics and
deterministic optimization to find the transmission layout and technology with
the least life cycle costs. The developed tool can be used in the first project
.
Create initial topologies
For each initial topology -> create new topologies

Save each feasible
Input data
topology
For each new topology -> optimize voltage level,
transmission technology and cable cross sections
Figure C.1: General methodology of the offshore transmission optimization tool [123]
planning stages, where only little information is available. The tool delivers as
output a set of solutions ranked after their life cycle costs which allows further
technical assessment of the proposed solutions. The developed tool includes a
user friendly interface and databases of equipment costs and equipment ratings
which can easily be updated by the user. This way, the tool can be used for
different projects, locations and market conditions.
C.3.1 General methodology
The objective of the developed tool is the minimization of the life cycle system
costs of transmission systems, connecting multiple offshore wind farms to the
onshore electricity grid. The life cycle system costs
lif∑
etime
Clcsc = Cinv + Closs,i + Cmain,i + Cnhe,i (C.1)
i=1
consist of investment (including installation) costs Cinv of transmission

equipment, costs of losses during the lifetime Closs , maintenance costs Cmain
and costs of not harvested energy Cnhe , caused by the unavailability of the
offshore transmission system.
The developed tool uses a multilevel optimization approach (figure C.1). Using
specified input data, first, a set of starting topologies are created. The starting
topologies consist of radial and ring shaped topologies. Based on the starting
topologies, new transmission topologies are created using rule based heuristics.
For each created topology, the transmission technology of each path (AC or
DC), the transmission system voltages (AC and/or DC) and cross sections of
necessary cables or overhead line are optimized in a deterministic way using
power flow calculations.
C.3.2 Rule based heuristics
The creation of new transmission topologies is carried out as follows (fig-

ure C.2):
1. In the first generation of topologies, a higher degree of meshing is achieved.

Therefore, each node of the transmission system is connected to at
least two different nodes. The additional connections are chosen on
a random basis to explore different regions of the search space. The
feasibility of each new topology is checked using the transmission voltage
and equipment ratings of the corresponding starting topology (parent
topology). Therefore, an AC power flow calculation is performed using
Matpower [90]. If the power flow calculation converges, the topology is
investigated further with the deterministic algorithm and saved. In case
the power flow calculation does not converge, the topology is discarded.
2. All topologies are modified so that the power flow on a single connection
path cannot exceed a maximum value as defined in the input data set.
This limit can be set by the TSO in order to maintain system security
or can be/is derived from technological or geographical constraints. The
limitation of the maximum power flow per path is achieved by iteratively
adding new connection paths to the system, until the maximum power
flow in the system is smaller than the set limit. Topologies obtained this
way are checked for feasibility as explained above and the deterministic
algorithm is applied to feasible topologies.
3. In the third generation, topologies resulting in the lowest costs are
pairwise crossed with each other. Two basic principles are applied during
crossing. First, topologies with higher number of connection paths are
created using a union set of both topologies (T1 ∪T2 ). Secondly, topologies
with a minimum number of connection path are created. Therefore
an intersection between both topologies is used, which only contains
transmission paths, which both topologies have in common (T1 ∩ T2 ).
4. Installation costs cause a significant part of the total investment costs of

equipment. In connection paths with low power ratings, the installation
costs can be significantly higher than the equipment costs. In this part
of the algorithm, such connection paths are eliminated. The threshold
for the minimum power rating can be defined by the user. Each new
topology is checked for feasibility and refined and saved if feasible.
5. In this last step, the crossing algorithm as explained above is used.

.
1.) Create new topologies with higher meshing-degree (M)
Check feasibility → refine & save

2.) Create new topologies respecting maximum power per path
(M)
3.) Cross topologies of number 1 & 2 (C)

4.) Create new topologies by eliminating path with low
capacity (M)
5.) Cross topologies of number 4 (C)
Figure C.2: Rule based heuristics to create new transmission topologies [124]
C.3.3 Optimization of voltage level, technology selection and

cable cross sections
Based on the topology determined by the heuristic algorithm, optimal the

transmission technology, transmission voltage and cable cross sections are
calculated (figure C.3).
Initially, neither the power flows on the connection paths nor the voltage levels
of the transmission system are known. Therefore, an initial power flow situation
is defined first, based on the topology and the rated power output of the wind
farms. Here it is assumed that the total wind power can be transmitted to
the shore. Using this initial power flow calculation, the investment costs,
the maintenance costs, and the costs of losses are calculated for all possible
combinations of AC (30 kV, 70 kV, 150 kV, 220 kV, 400 kV) and DC (±80 kV,
±150kV, ±320kV) voltages in two nested loops. Hence 15 different costs are
calculated, whereas the solution with the lowest costs is chosen to be the best.
The 5 step calculation procedure is described below.
1. The optimal technology for each transmission path is determined using

the empirical function as depicted (figure C.4).
.Defineinitial power flow situation

Loop: For each combination of AC and DC voltages
1) Make AC/DC decision for each path
2) Calculate equipment ratings and admittance matrix
NO 3) Power flow calculation
4) Calculate equipment ratings and admittance matrix
Change in power flow ≤ threshold ?
YES
5) Calculate investment costs, maintenance costs and costs for

losses
End of loop
Choose combination with lowest costs
Calculate costs for not transported energy using OPF
Figure C.3: Optimization routine for voltage, technology and cable cross sections [123]
2. After the selection of the technology, the necessary cross sections are
calculated using the specific voltage level. Therefore first the minimum
number of cables is calculated using the highest cross section and
sequentially, the minimum cross section is determined based on the
minimum number. The admittance matrix of the entire system is
determined based on the number and cross sections of the cables. If
necessary, also impedances of transformers, reactive power compensation
devices and HVDC converters are included in the admittance matrix.
3. Using the admittance matrix of the system, a new AC power flow
calculation is performed using Matpower [90].
4. Obviously, the power flow calculation is based on an admittance matrix
calculated with the power flows of the iteration before. These results are
based on the assumed power flows. Therefore, the admittance matrix is
recalculated, and the steps 1 to 4 repeated, until the change in power
flows is below a certain threshold, or a maximum number of iterations is
reached.
5. In the last step, the investment costs, the costs of losses and maintenance
costs are determined. For the calculation of losses, the wind power output
of wind farms is modelled with an hourly resolution based on Weibull
distributed wind speeds.
Using the 5 step calculation procedure, 15 values for the life cycle costs are
obtained for each possible combination of AC and DC voltages. To complete
220
200
180
Offshore transmission distance in km 160
140
120 HVDC
100
80
60
HVAC
40
20
0. .
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200
Capacity of offshore transmission path in MW
Figure C.4: technology decision function for offshore transmission paths
the life cycle costs, the costs for non-harvested energy due to unavailability of
equipment has to calculated. The calculation performed as an N-1 security
analysis with optimal power flow calculations considering possible power
dispatch between farms. As this calculation is very time consuming, it is only
performed for a certain number of topologies which is specified by the user.
C.3.4 Input and output interfaces
The developed software includes user friendly input and output interfaces. The
general input interface shows offshore, onshore and prohibited areas as well as
positions of wind farms and points of common coupling (figure C.5a). From the
general input interface, sub-menus for wind farms, points of common couplings,
prohibited areas, onshore areas, options, cable data and cost functions can
be opened. In the wind farm interface, the position, power rating, capacity
factor (full load hours) and internal voltage level of wind farms can be
defined (figure C.5b). In the PCC (point of common coupling) interface, the
positions, power injection capability and voltage level of PCCs can be specified
(figure C.5c). In the onshore and prohibited area interfaces, geographic
positions of these areas can be defined. Additional options such as lifetime,
frequency, maximum power and interest rate can be specified in the options
interface (figure C.5d). Although default values are provided, in the interfaces
cable data and cost functions, user defined values can be entered.
(a) General input interface (b) Input interface of wind farms
(c) Input interface of points of common

(d) Input interface for additional options
coupling
Figure C.5: Input interfaces of developed tool
The output interface shows the transmission system topology for all feasible
solutions ranked after their life cycle costs. The graphical interface shows which
nodes are connected and which technology is used for each transmission path
(figure C.6a). Additional information about the necessary number and cross
sections of cables as well as a breakdown of the costs is provided (figure C.6b,
figure C.6c).
(a) General output interface
(b) Output interface showing cable details (c) Output interface equipment showing
costs
Figure C.6: Input interfaces of developed tool

Bibliography
[1] T. P. Hughes, Networks of Power, Electrification in Western Society,

1880-1930. John Hopkins University Press, 1993.
[2] V. Lagendijk, “Electrifying Europe, The power of Europe in the
construction of electricity networks,” Ph.D. dissertation, Technical
University Eindhoven, 2009, ISBN 9789052603094.
[3] O. Oliven. Vorschlag eines Europäischen Großkraftnetzes. http://extras.
springer.com/1931/978-3-7091-5155-6/978-3-7091-5155-6_OSFO1.pdf.
Last checked: 28.10.2014.
[4] Entso-e. Interconnected System Grid Maps. https://www.entsoe.eu/
publications/order-maps-and-publications/electronic-grid-maps/Pages/
default.aspx. Last checked: 28.10.2014.
[5] Eurelectric Facts Database. Electricity Generation by Primary Energy.
http://www.eurelectric.org/factsfolders/DocLink.asp?DocID=72139.
[6] ——. Maximum Net Generation Capacity by Primary Energy. http:
//www.eurelectric.org/factsfolders/factsfolder.asp?FolderID=5245. Last
checked: 28.10.2014.
[7] EWEA. (2014, Feb.) Wind in Power - 2013 European Statistics.
http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/files/library/publications/statistics/
EWEA_Annual_Statistics_2013.pdf. Last checked: 28.10.2014.
[8] Entso-e. Ten Year Network Development Plan 2012. https:
//www.entsoe.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/_library/SDC/TYNDP/
2012/TYNDP_2012_report.pdf. Last checked: 28.10.2014.
[9] EWEA. (2014, Jul.) Wind Energy Scenarios for 2020. http:
//www.ewea.org/fileadmin/files/library/publications/scenarios/
EWEA-Wind-energy-scenarios-2020.pdf. Last checked: 28.10.2014.
145
146 BIBLIOGRAPHY
[10] European Climate Foundation (ECF), “Roadmap 2050, A Practical

Guide To A Prosperous, Low-Carbon Europe,” http://www.
roadmap2050.eu/attachments/files/Volume1_fullreport_PressPack.pdf,
ECF, Tech. Rep., 2010, last checked: 28.10.2014.
[11] J. De Decker and P. Kreutzkamp, “Offshore Electricity Grid Infrastruc-
ture in Europe - Final Report,” 3E, Tech. Rep., Oct. 2011.
[12] Desertec Industrial Initiative (DII), “Industrial initiatives dii and

medgrid join forces for the development of industrial-scale renewable
energy,” 2011, last checked: 28.10.2014. [Online]. Available: http:
//www.dii-eumena.com
[13] L. Moreno, “Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) in DESERTEC - Analysis

of technologies to secure and affordable Energy Supply,” in Intelligent
Data Acquisition and Advanced Computing Systems (IDAACS), 2011
IEEE 6th International Conference on, vol. 2, Sep. 2011, pp. 923 – 926.
[14] Desertec Foundation, “Tunisian sun will light european homes by 2016,”
http://www.desertec.org, 2012, last checked: 28.10.2014.
[15] Greenpeace. (2011) Battle of the Grids. http://www.greenpeace.org/

seasia/ph/Global/international/publications/climate/2011/battle%
20of%20the%20grids.pdf. Last checked: 28.10.2014.
[16] A. T. Troester E., Kuwahata R. (2011) European Grid Study
2030/2050. http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/ph/Global/international/
publications/climate/2011/battle%20of%20the%20grids.pdf.
[17] Friends of the Super Grid. (2014) Supergrid preparatory

phase: review of existing studies and recommendations
to move forwards. http://www.friendsofthesupergrid.eu/
fosg-report-on-the-preparatory-phase-of-a-supergrid-3/. Last checked:
28.10.2014.
[18] P. E. Morthorst, H. Auer, A. Garrad, and I. Blanco, “Application
and Required Developments of Dynamic Models to Support Practical
Planning,” CIGRE, Technical Brochure 312, Working Group C1.04, Tech.
Rep., Feb. 2007.
[19] D. Kirschen and G. Strbac, Fundamentals of Power System Economics.

Wiley Online Library, 2004.
[20] D. Van Hertem, G.-B. Oriol, and L. Jun, Building the Grid of the Future
Using HVDC. Wiley, Under Review.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 147
[21] 50-Hertz Transmission GmbH, “Predicted and actual wind

infeeds,” 2014, last checked: 10.06.2014. [Online].
Available: http://www.50hertz.com/cps/rde/xchg/trm_de/hs.xsl/152.
htm?rdeLocaleAttr=de&&rdeCOQ=SID-D779C28B-56985E7F
[22] H. Ergun, B. Rawn, R. Belmans, and D. Van Hertem, “Technology
and topology optimization for multizonal transmission systems,” Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 2469–2477, Sep. 2014.
[23] P. Buijs and R. Belmans, “Transmission investments in a multilateral
context,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 475–
483, Feb. 2012.
[24] G. Latorre, R. Cruz, J. Areiza, and A. Villegas, “Classification of

Publications and Models on Transmission Expansion Planning,” Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 938 – 946, May 2003.
[25] L. Garver, “Transmission Network Estimation Using Linear Program-
ming,” Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. PAS-
89, no. 7, pp. 1688 –1697, Sep. 1970.
[26] R. Villasana, L. L. Garver, and S. J. Salon, “Transmission Network

Planning Using Linear Programming,” Power Engineering Review, IEEE,
vol. PER-5, no. 2, pp. 36 –37, Feb. 1985.
[27] V. Levi and M. Calovic, “Linear-programming-based decomposition
method for optimal planning of transmission network investments,”
Generation, Transmission and Distribution, IEE Proceedings C, vol. 140,
no. 6, pp. 516 –522, Nov. 1993.
[28] ——, “A new decomposition based method for optimal expansion
planning of large transmission networks,” Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 937 –943, Aug. 1991.
[29] R. Chanda and P. Bhattacharjee, “Application of computer software in

transmission expansion planning using variable load structure,” Electric
Power Systems Research, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 13 – 20, 1994.
[30] K. Kim, Y. Park, and K. Lee, “Optimal long term transmission

expansion planning based on maximum principle,” Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 1494 –1501, Nov. 1988.
[31] Y. Dusonchet and A. El-Abiad, “Transmission Planning Using
Discrete Dynamic Optimizing,” Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. PAS-92, no. 4, pp. 1358 –1371, Jul. 1973.
148 BIBLIOGRAPHY
[32] H. Youssef and R. Hackam, “New transmission planning model,” Power

Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 9 –18, Feb. 1989.
[33] V. A. Levi, “A new mixed-integer methodology for optimal transmission
expansion planning,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 32, no. 3, pp.
227 – 238, 1995.
[34] L. Bahiense, G. Oliveira, M. Pereira, and S. Granville, “A mixed integer
disjunctive model for transmission network expansion,” Power Systems,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 560 –565, Aug. 2001.
[35] S. Haffner, A. Monticelli, A. Garcia, J. Mantovani, and R. Romero,
“Branch and bound algorithm for transmission system expansion
planning using a transportation model,” Generation, Transmission and
Distribution, IEE Proceedings-, vol. 147, no. 3, pp. 149 –156, May 2000.
[36] A. Seifu, S. Salon, and G. List, “Optimization of transmission
line planning including security constraints,” Power Systems, IEEE
[37] J. dos Santos, A., P. Franca, and A. Said, “An optimization model
for long-range transmission expansion planning,” Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 94 –101, Feb. 1989.
[38] A. Sharifnia and H. Aashtiani, “Transmission Network Planning: A
Method for Synthesis of Minimum-Cost Secure Networks,” Power
Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. PAS-104, no. 8, pp.
2025 –2034, Aug. 1985.
[39] A. Meliopoulos, R. Webb, R. Bennon, and J. Juves, “Optimal Long
Range Transmission Planning with AC Load Flow,” Power Apparatus
and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. PAS-101, no. 10, pp. 4156 –
4163, Oct. 1982.
[40] S. Lee, K. Hicks, and E. Hnyilicza, “Transmission Expansion by Branch-
and-Bound Integer Programming with Optimal Cost - Capacity Curves,”
Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. PAS-93, no. 5,
pp. 1390 –1400, Sep. 1974.
[41] S. Binato, M. Pereira, and S. Granville, “A New Benders Decomposition
Approach to Solve Power Transmission Network Design Problems,”
Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 235 –240, May
2001.
[42] S. Siddiqi and M. Baughman, “Value-Based Transmission Planning and
the Effects of Network Models,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 1835 –1842, Nov. 1995.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 149
[43] R. Romero and A. Monticelli, “A zero-one Implicit Enumeration Method

for Optimizing Investments in Transmission Expansion Planning,” Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 1385 –1391, Aug. 1994.
[44] M. Pereira, L. Pinto, S. Cunha, and G. Oliveira, “A Decomposition
Approach To Automated Generation/Transmission Expansion Planning,”
Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. PAS-104,
no. 11, pp. 3074 –3083, Nov. 1985.
[45] R. Romero and A. Monticelli, “A Hierarchical Decomposition Approach
for Transmission Network Expansion Planning,” Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 373 –380, Feb. 1994.
[46] W. Puntel and R. Fischl, “Computer Aided Design of Electric Power
Transmission Networks,” IEEE Winter Power Meeting, Jan. 1972.
[47] M. Pereira and L. Pinto, “Application Of Sensitivity Analysis Of Load
Supplying Capability To Interactive Transmission Expansion Planning,”
no. 2, pp. 381 –389, Feb. 1985.
[48] A. Ekwue and B. Cory, “Transmission System Expansion Planning by
Interactive Methods,” Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions
on, vol. PAS-103, no. 7, pp. 1583 –1591, Jul. 1984.
[49] A. Ekwue, “Investigations of the transmission system expansion
problem,” International Journal of Electrical Power; Energy Systems,
vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 139 – 142, 1984.
[50] A. Monticelli, A. Santos, M. Pereira, S. Cunha, B. Parker, and
J. Praca, “Interactive Transmission Network Planning Using a Least-
Effort Criterion,” Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. PAS-101, no. 10, pp. 3919 –3925, Oct. 1982.
[51] R. Bennon, J. Juves, and A. Meliopoulos, “Use of Sensitivity Analysis
in Automated Transmission Planning,” Power Apparatus and Systems,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. PAS-101, no. 1, pp. 53 –59, Jan. 1982.
[52] C. Dechamps and E. Jamoulle, “Interactive computer program for
planning the expansion of meshed transmission networks,” International
Journal of Electrical Power; Energy Systems, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 103 – 108,
1980.
[53] C. Serna, J. Duran, and A. Camargo, “A Model for Expansion Planning
of Transmission Systems A Practical Application Example,” Power
Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. PAS-97, no. 2, pp.
610 –615, Mar. 1978.
150 BIBLIOGRAPHY
[54] Latorre-Bayona, G. and Perez-Arriaga, I.J., “CHOPIN, a Heuristic Model

for Long Term Transmission Expansion Planning,” Power Systems, IEEE
[55] E. da Silva, H. Gil, and J. Areiza, “Transmission Network Expansion

Planning under an Improved Genetic Algorithm,” in Power Industry
Computer Applications, 1999. PICA ’99. Proceedings of the 21st 1999
IEEE International Conference, Jul. 1999, pp. 315 –321.
[56] E. Da Silva, H. Gil, and J. Areiza, “Transmission Network Expansion
Planning under an Improved Genetic Algorithm,” Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 1168 –1174, Aug. 2000.
[57] K. Yoshimoto, K. Yasuda, and R. Yokoyama, “Transmission expansion

planning using neuro-computing hybridized with genetic algorithm,” in
Evolutionary Computation, 1995., IEEE International Conference on,
vol. 1, Dec. 1995, p. 126.
[58] R. Gallego, A. Monticelli, and R. Romero, “Comparative studies on

nonconvex optimization methods for transmission network expansion
planning,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 13, no. 3, pp.
822 –828, Aug. 1998.
[59] ——, “Transmission system expansion planning by an extended

genetic algorithm,” Generation, Transmission and Distribution, IEE
Proceedings-, vol. 145, no. 3, pp. 329 –335, May 1998.
[60] A. Escobar, R. A. Gallego, R. L. Romero, and S. A. de Oliveira, “Hybrid
model analysis and constructive algorithms in the performance of a
genetic algorithm for the planning of an electric power transmission
system,” Proc. 17th Int. Conf. CARS and FOF, 2001.
[61] H. Gil and E. da Silva, “A reliable approach for solving the transmission
network expansion planning problem using genetic algorithms,” Electric
Power Systems Research, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 45 – 51, 2001.
[62] R. Romero, R. Gallego, and A. Monticelli, “Transmission system

expansion planning by simulated annealing,” in Power Industry
Computer Application Conference, 1995. Conference Proceedings., 1995
IEEE, May 1995, pp. 278 –283.
[63] R. Gallego, A. Alves, A. Monticelli, and R. Romero, “Parallel simulated
annealing applied to long term transmission network expansion planning,”
Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 181 –188, Feb.
1997.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 151
[64] R. Teive, E. Silva, and L. Fonseca, “A Cooperative Expert System for

Transmission Expansion Planning of Electrical Power Systems,” Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 636 –642, May 1998.
[65] R. Teive, A. Hawken, and M. Laugthon, “Knowledge-based System

for Electrical Power Networks Transmission Expansion Planning,”
in Transmission and Distribution Conference and Exposition: Latin
America, 2004 IEEE/PES, Nov. 2004, pp. 435 – 440.
[66] J.-R. Shin and Y.-M. Park, “Optimal long-term Transmission Planning
by Expert System Approach,” in TENCON ’93. Proceedings. Computer,
Communication, Control and Power Engineering.1993 IEEE Region 10
Conference on, Oct. 1993, pp. 713 –717 vol.2.
[67] H. Sun and D. Yu, “A Multiple-objective Optimization Model of
Transmission Enhancement Planning for Independent Transmission
Company (ITC),” in Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 2000.
IEEE, vol. 4, 2000, pp. 2033 –2038 vol. 4.
[68] R. Gallego, R. Romero, and A. Monticelli, “Tabu search algorithm for
network synthesis,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 15, no. 2,
pp. 490 –495, May 2000.
[69] E. Da Silva, J. Ortiz, G. De Oliveira, and S. Binato, “Transmission

network expansion planning under a Tabu Search approach,” Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 62 –68, Feb. 2001.
[70] F. Wen and C. Chang, “Transmission network optimal planning using the
tabu search method,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 42, no. 2, pp.
153 – 163, 1997.
[71] P. Sensarma, M. Rahmani, and A. Carvalho, “A comprehensive method

for optimal expansion planning using particle swarm optimization,” in
Power Engineering Society Winter Meeting, 2002. IEEE, vol. 2, 2002,
pp. 1317 – 1322 vol.2.
[72] P. Maghouli, S. Hosseini, M. Buygi, and M. Shahidehpour, “A

Multi-Objective Framework for Transmission Expansion Planning in
Deregulated Environments,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on,
vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 1051 –1061, May 2009.
[73] H. Kakuta and H. Mori, “A Multi-objective Memetic Algorithm for
probabilistic transmission network expansion planning,” in Systems Man
and Cybernetics (SMC), 2010 IEEE International Conference on, Oct.
2010, pp. 1414 –1419.
152 BIBLIOGRAPHY
[74] J. Contreras and F. Wu, “A kernel-oriented algorithm for transmission

expansion planning,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 15,
no. 4, pp. 1434 –1440, Nov. 2000.
[75] ——, “Coalition formation in transmission expansion planning,” Power

Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1144 –1152, Aug. 1999.
[76] J. Contreras, “A cooperative game theory approach to transmission

planning in power systems,” Ph.D., Univ. California Berkeley, 1997.
[77] A. Orths and Z. Styczynski, “Game theoretical approach to power
network planning,” in Power Tech Proceedings, 2001 IEEE Porto, vol. 1,
2001, p. 6 pp. vol.1.
[78] O. Azadegan, R. Hager, F. Leuthold, K. Reich, T. Schreier, G. Layr,

C. Todem, C. von Hirschhausen, O. Wadosch, and H. Weigt, “Price, Cost
and Financial Aspects of Network Expansion in the European Context,”
RealiseGrid Project Report, Apr. 2010, last checked: 28.10.2014. [Online].
Available: http://realisegrid.rse-web.it/content/files/File/Publications%
20and%20results/Deliverable_REALISEGRID_3.2.2.pdf
[79] J.-C. Kaltenbach, J. Peschon, and E. Gehrig, “A Mathematical Opti-

mization Technique for the Expansion of Electric Power Transmission
Systems,” Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol.
PAS-89, no. 1, pp. 113 –119, Jan. 1970.
[80] J. Dodu and A. Merlin, “Dynamic Model for long-term Expansion

Planning Studies of Power Transmission Systems: the Ortie Model,”
International Journal of Electrical Power; Energy Systems, vol. 3, no. 1,
pp. 2 – 16, 1981.
[81] S. Binato and G. C. Oliveira, “A Heuristic Procedure to Cope with multi-

year Transmission Expansion Planning,” IEEE/KTH Stockholm Power
Tech. Conf., Jun. 1995.
[82] Entso-e. Ten Year Network Development Plan 2014. https:
//www.entsoe.eu/Documents/TYNDP%20documents/TYNDP%
202014/141031%20TYNDP%202014.pdf. Last checked: 11.12.2014.
[83] ——. Guideline for Cost Benefit Analysis of Grid Development

Projects. https://www.entsoe.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/_library/
events/Workshops/CBA/131114_ENTSO-E_CBA_Methodology.pdf.
[84] A. R. Ciupuliga and M. Gibescu, “Report on extension and harmonisation
of transmission planning criteria,” RealiseGrid Project Report, Nov. 2010.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 153
[85] R. Calisti and M. V. Cazzol, “Tool for the assessment of benefits given
by the expansion of transmission infrastructures,” RealiseGrid Project
Report, Jun. 2011.
[86] European University Institute. Cost Benefit Analysis in the Context

of the Energy Infrastructure Package. http://www.eui.eu/Projects/
THINK/Research/Topic10.aspx. Last checked: 11.12.2014.
[87] O. Gjerde, L. Warland, L. Aleixo, and I. H. Doskeland, “Integrated

approach for reliability of electricity supply analysis studies of
demonstration network,” Cigre Session, Aug. 2012.
[88] S. P. Vajjhala and P. S. Fischbeck, “Quantifying siting difficulty:
A case study of us transmission line siting,” Energy Policy,
vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 650 – 671, 2007. [Online]. Available: http:
//www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421506000048
[89] H. Ergun, D. Van Hertem, and R. Belmans, “Identification of Power
Injection Capabilities for Transmission System Investment Optimization,”
10th IEEE PowerTech Conference, Jun. 2013, Grenoble, France.
[90] R. D. Zimmerman and C. E. Murillo-Sánchez, “MATPOWER: Steady-

State Operations, Planning, and Analysis Tools for Power Systems
Research and Education,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 26,
pp. 12 – 19, 2011.
[91] D. Oeding and B. Oswald, Elektrische Kraftwerke und Netze, 6th ed.
Springer-Verlag, 2004, ISBN 3-540-00863-2.
[92] D. University of Washington. Power System Test Case Archive, 118 Bus
Power Flow Test Case. http://www.ee.washington.edu/research/pstca/
pf118/pg_tca118bus.htm.
[93] B. Borkowska, “Probabilistic Load Flow,” IEEE Transactions on Power
Apparatus and Systems, vol. 3, pp. 752–759, 1974.
[94] R. Allan, B. Borkowska, and C. Grigg, “Probabilistic Analysis of Power
Flows,” Proceedings of the Institution of Electrical Engineers, vol. 121,
pp. 1551–1556, 1974.
[95] W. Charytoniuk and J. Niebrzydowski, “Confidence interval construction
for load forecast,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 97
– 103, 1998. [Online]. Available: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S0378779698000935
154 BIBLIOGRAPHY
[96] G. Valverde, A. Saric, and V. Terzija, “Probabilistic load flow with non-
Gaussian correlated random variables using Gaussian mixture models,”
IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution, vol. 6, no. 7, pp. 701–709,
2012. [Online]. Available: http://link.aip.org/link/?GTD/6/701/1
[97] H. Sirisena and E. P. M. Brown, “Representation of non-gaussian
probability distributions in stochastic load-flow studies by the method
of gaussian sum approximations,” Generation, Transmission and
Distribution, IEE Proceedings C, vol. 130, no. 4, pp. 165–171, Jul. 1983.
[98] G. Valverde, A. T. Saric, and V. Terzija, “Stochastic Monitoring of

Distribution Networks Including Correlated Input Variables,” Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. PP, no. 99, p. 1, 2012.
[99] A. Runnalls, “Kullback-leibler approach to gaussian mixture reduction,”
Aerospace and Electronic Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 43, no. 3,
pp. 989–999, Jul. 2007.
[100] J. Williams and P. Maybeck, “Cost-function-based gaussian mixture

reduction for target tracking,” in Information Fusion, 2003. Proceedings
of the Sixth International Conference of, vol. 2, Jul. 2003, pp. 1047–1054.
[101] Elia. Hourly system loads 2012. http://www.elia.be/en/grid-data/
data-download.
[102] J. Guo, Y. Fu, Z. Li, and M. Shahidehpour, “Direct Calculation of Line
Outage Distribution Factors,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,
vol. 24, pp. 1633–1634, Aug. 2009.
[103] N. G. Hingorani and L. Gyugyi, Understanding FACTS. IEEE Press,

New York-USA, 2000, ISBN 0-7803-3455-8.
[104] N. Srinivasan, K. Prakasa Rao, C. Indulkar, and S. Venkata, “On-line

computation of phase shifter distribution factors and lineload alleviation,”
no. 7, pp. 1656 –1662, Jul. 1985.
[105] Han, Z.X., “Phase Shifter and Power Flow Control,” Power Apparatus
and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. PAS-101, no. 10, pp. 3790–3795,
Oct 1982.
[106] J. Verboomen, D. Van Hertem, P. Schavemaker, W. Kling, and R. Bel-

mans, “Border-flow control by means of phase shifting transformers,” in
IEEE Power Tech, Lausanne, Jul. 2007, pp. 1338 –1343.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 155
[107] W. Kling, D. Klaar, J. Schuld, A. Kanters, C. Koreman, H. Reijnders,

and C. Spoorenberg, “Phase shifting transformers installed in The
Netherlands in order to increase available international transmission
capacity,” in Cigre Sessions 2004, 2004.
[108] J. Rimez, R. V. D. Planken, D. Wiot, E. Jottrand, G. Claessens, and
J. Declercq, “Grid Implementation of a 400MVA 220/150kV 15◦ / + 3◦
Phase Shifting Transformer For Power Flow Control in the Belgian
Network: Specification and Operational Considerations,” in Cigre
Sessions 2006, Paris, 2006.
[109] R. D. Zimmerman and C. E. Murillo-Sánchez, “Matpower 4.1 User’s
Manual,” Dec. 2011. [Online]. Available: http://www.pserc.cornell.edu/
matpower/manual.pdf
[110] T. Achterberg, “Constraint integer programming,” Ph.D. dissertation,

Technische Universität Berlin, 2009. [Online]. Available: scip.zib.de
[111] SCIP. (2014) Solving Constraint Integer Programs. http://scip.zib.de.

[112] Industrial Information and Control Centre New Zeeland. (2014)

Opti Toolbox. http://www.i2c2.aut.ac.nz/Wiki/OPTI/. Last checked:
10.12.2014.
[113] IBM. (2014) CPLEX Optimizer. hhttp://www-01.ibm.com/software/
commerce/optimization/cplex-optimizer/. Last checked: 10.12.2014.
[114] E. Dijkstra, “A Note on Two Problems in Connexion with Graphs,”
Numerische Mathematik, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 269–271, 1959.
[115] R. Dechter and J. Pearl, “Generalized Best-first Search Strategies and
the Optimality of A*,” J. ACM, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 505–536, Jul. 1985.
[Online]. Available: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/3828.3830
[116] C. Grigg, P. Wong, P. Albrecht, R. Allan, M. Bhavaraju, R. Billinton,

Q. Chen, C. Fong, S. Haddad, S. Kuruganty, W. Li, R. Mukerji,
D. Patton, N. Rau, D. Reppen, A. Schneider, M. Shahidehpour, and
C. Singh, “The IEEE Reliability Test System-1996. A report prepared by
the Reliability Test System Task Force of the Application of Probability
Methods Subcommittee,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 14,
no. 3, pp. 1010–1020, 1999.
[117] H. Ergun, D. Van Hertem, and R. Belmans, “Building A New OVerlay

Grid For Europe,” in IEEE PES General Meeting, Jul. 2012.
156 BIBLIOGRAPHY
[118] European Climate Foundation (ECF), “Power Perspectives 2030 - On

the road to a decarbonised power sector,” http://www.roadmap2050.eu/
attachments/files/PowerPerspectives2030_FullReport.pdf, ECF, Tech.
Rep., 2011.
[119] Socio-economic Data and Applications Center. (2014) Population
density map of Europe. http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/maps/gallery/
search/2?facets=theme:population&facets=region:europe. Last checked:
28.10.2014.
[120] ——. (2014) Elevation map of Europe. http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.

edu/maps/gallery/search?facets=region%3Aeurope&contains=elevation.
[121] Q. Zhou and J. Bialek, “Approximate model of european interconnected
system as a benchmark system to study effects of cross-border trades,”
Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 782–788, May
2005.
[122] Wikipedia. (2014) Cost of electricity by source. http://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source. Last checked: 28.10.2014.
[123] H. Ergun, D. Van Hertem, and R. Belmans, “Transmission system topol-
ogy optimization for large-scale offshore wind integration,” Sustainable
Energy, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 908–917, 2012.
[124] ——, “Optimization Tool for Offshore Wind Connections,” CIGRE

Symposium - Innovation for Secure and Efficient Transmission Grids,
2014, (art. nr. 3A - 122), Brussels-Belgium.
List of publications
Journal Publications
• Ergun, H., Rawn, B., Belmans, R., Van Hertem, D. Investment Plan
Optimization for Long Term, Large Scale and Multizonal Transmission
System Expansion. Submitted to IEEE Transactions on Power Systems
• Ergun, H., Rawn, B., Belmans, R., Van Hertem, D. (2014). Technology
and Topology Optimization for Multizonal Transmission Systems. IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, 29 (5), 2469-2477.
• Ergun, H., Van Hertem, D., Belmans, R. (2012). Transmission System

Topology Optimization for Large-Scale Offshore Wind Integration. IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 3 (4), 908-917.
• De Rijcke, S., Ergun, H., Van Hertem, D., Driesen, J. (2012). Grid
Impact of Voltage Control and Reactive Power Support by Wind Turbines
Equipped With Direct-Drive Synchronous Machines. IEEE Transactions
on Sustainable Energy, 3 (4), 890-898.
Conference Publications
• Ergun, H., Van Hertem, D., Belmans, R. Optimal Design of a North Sea
Transmission Grid Considering Spatial and Temporal Aspects Abstract
submitted to IEEE PowerTech Conference 2015
• Ergun, H., Van Hertem, D., Belmans, R. (2014). Optimization Tool

for Offshore Wind Connections. CIGRE Belgium 2014 - Innovation for
Secure and Efficient Transmission Grids, 12-13 March 2014 (art.nr. 3A -
122).
157
158 LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
• Ergun, H., Van Hertem, D., Belmans, R. (2013). Identification of Power

Injection Capabilities for Transmission System Investment Optimization.
IEEE PowerTech Conference. Grenoble - France, 16-20 June 2013.
• Tielens, P., Ergun, H., Van Hertem, D. (2012). Techno-economic

Analysis of Large-scale Integration of Solar Power Plants in the European
Grid. International Solar Integration Workshop. Lisbon, Portugal, 12-13
November 2012.
• Ergun, H., Beerten, J., Van Hertem, D. (2012). Building a new overlay
grid for Europe. Proceedings of the IEEE PES General meeting 2012.
IEEE PES General Meeting. San Diego, 22-26 July 2012 (pp. 1-10).
• Ergun, H., Van Hertem, D., Belmans, R. (2011). Multi level optimization
for offshore grid planning. Cigrè International Symposium THE ELEC-
TRIC POWER SYSTEM OF THE FUTURE Integrating supergrids and
microgrids. Bologna-Italy, 13-16 September 2011.
• De Rijcke, S., Ergun, H., De Vos, K., Driesen, J. (2011). Grid Integration
of Large-scale Wind Turbines Equipped With Full Converters: Belgian
Case Study. . EWEA Event. Brussels, 14-17 March 2011.
• Ergun, H., Van Hertem, D., Belmans, R. (2010). CoST Of Wind
- Appropriate Connection Selection Tool for Offshore Wind Farms.
International Workshop on Large-Scale Integration of Wind Power into
Power Systems as well as on Transmission Networks for Offshore Wind
Power Plans. Quebec, 18-19 October 2010.
• Ergun, H., Renner, H., Friedl, K. (2010). Characteristic Spectra of

Harmonic Currents in Austrian Electricity Transmission an Distribution
Networks. The 7th Conference 2010 electric Power Quality and Supply
Reliability. Electric Power Quality and Supply Reliability. Tallinn, 16-18
June 2010.
Curriculum Vitae
Hakan Ergun
Born on February, the 16th , 1983 in Leoben, Austria
1998 - 2003 Secondary school

HTBL Kapfenberg, Austria
Technical secondary school for electrical engineering
2003 - 2004 Military service in Zeltweg, Austria
2004 - 2009 Master of science in electrical engineering
Graz University of Technology, Austria
2010 - 2015 Ph.D in electrical engineering
Department of Electrical Engineering - ESAT
Division, Electrical Energy and Computer Architectures, ELECTA
KU Leuven, Belgium
159
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING SCIENCE
DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING
DIVISION OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY AND COMPUTER ARCHITECTURES (ELECTA)
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10, Bus 2445
B-3001 Heverlee
hakan.ergun@esat.kuleuven.be
http://www.esat.kuleuven.be/electa

Future Grid PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

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

Future Grid PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

ARENBERG DOCTORAL SCHOOL

Faculty of Engineering Science

Grid Planning for the Future Grid

Supervisor: Dissertation presented in partial

Optimizing Topology and Technology Considering Spatial and Tempo-

Examination committee: Dissertation presented in partial

Increased use of renewable energy sources and the creation of an internal

Toegenomen gebruik van hernieuwbare energiebronnen en de totstandkoming

knooppunten op basis van probabilistische optimale power flow berekeningen.

The following chapters are the closing words of a significant chapter of my

is quite depressing in terms of weather.

PST Phase Shifting Transformer

List of Figures xix

List of Tables xxiii

2 Transmission Grid Planning 15

2.2 Functionality of grids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3 Maximum Power Injection Capabilities 41

3.4.4 Comparison of Monte Carlo Simulation and GCCM . . 56

4 Optimization of Topology, Technology and Routing 67

5 Optimization of Investment Time Points 91

6 Application of the transmission investment optimization method-

7 Conclusions and future work 121

A Network data of modified IEEE 24 Bus Test system for MPIC

B Spatial weights for installation costs of equipment 133

C Developed Software 135

List of publications 157

Curriculum Vitae 159

1.1 Pan-European transmission grid proposed in 1930 . . . . . . . . 3

2.1 Investment needs on regional and substation level . . . . . . . . 19

3.1 Principle of network abstraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

4.1 Iterative optimization of transmission topology, technology,

4.7 Spatial map of area of focus showing candidate nodes . . . . . 84

5.1 The process of transmission system investments . . . . . . . . . 92

6.1 Required additional transmission capacity for 2050 . . . . . . . 108

A.1 The IEEE 24 bus test system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

C.1 General methodology of the offshore transmission optimization

6.1 Comparison of different maximum power ratings per path . . . 117

A.1 Bus data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

B.1 Spacial weights for elevation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

1.1 Historic Development of the European Trans-

Figure 1.1: Pan-European transmission grid as proposed by Oskar Oliven at

interconnections and the operation of tie lines were coordinated bilaterally.

1.2 European Grid Today and Future Perspectives

Figure 1.3: The Entso-e transmission grid [4]

0. . 1980 1990 2000 2008 2009 2010 2020 2030

0. . 1980 1990 2000 2008 2009 2010 2020 2030

Figure 1.6: Schematic illustration of transmission grid investment needs on

HVDC submarine connections are primarily used to connect non-synchronous

As elaborated in the previous section, several 100 Ge should be invested in

1.4 Objectives, context and contribution

The aim of this thesis is to provide the building blocks of a methodology

This thesis is developed in the course of the industrial research project

At the grid planning department of Elia, the optimization methodology is

• Methodology/tool to calculate the maximum power injection capability of

• Methodology/tool to optimize transmission topology, rating and time

optimal investment sequence minimizing investment costs of new assets

Structure of the thesis

The thesis is organized as follows.

Chapter 6 shows a case study to demonstrate the practical application of the

Transmission Grid Planning

I love it when a plan comes together! - Col. John Hannibal Smith

2.1 Context of Transmission System Planning

The electric power system consists of generation, demand and transmission.