Problem 1:

𝐶1 (𝑃1 ) = 0.004𝑃12 + 7.2𝑃1 + 350, 100 ≤ 𝑃1 ≤ 400

𝐶2 (𝑃2 ) = 0.0025𝑃22 + 7.3𝑃2 + 500, 150 ≤ 𝑃2 ≤ 600
𝐶3 (𝑃3 ) = 0.003𝑃32 + 6.74𝑃3 + 600, 50 ≤ 𝑃3 ≤ 300
𝑃𝐷 = 975 𝑀𝑊
First, we form the Lagrangian:

𝐹 = 𝐶1 (𝑃1 ) + 𝐶2 (𝑃2 ) + 𝐶3 (𝑃3 ) + 𝜆(𝑃𝐷 − 𝑃1 − 𝑃2 − 𝑃3 )

Conditions for optimality (KKT conditions) are:

𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 0.008 ∗ 𝑃1 + 7.2 − 𝜆 = 0 … (1)
𝜕𝑃1
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 0.005 ∗ 𝑃2 + 7.3 − 𝜆 = 0 … (2)
𝜕𝑃2
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 0.006 ∗ 𝑃3 + 6.74 − 𝜆 = 0 … (3)
𝜕𝑃3
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 𝑃1 + 𝑃2 + 𝑃3 − 975 = 0 … (4)
𝜕𝜆

Equations (1) & (2) give:

0.008 ∗ 𝑃1 − 0.005 ∗ 𝑃2 = 0.1 … (5)

Equations (2) & (3) give:

0.005 ∗ 𝑃2 − 0.006 ∗ 𝑃3 = −0.56 … (6)

Solving equations (4), (5) & (6) using Cramer’s rule:

975 1 1
| 0.1 −0.005 0 |
𝑃1 = −0.56 0.005 −0.006 = 233.4746 𝑀𝑊
1 1 1
|0.008 −0.005 0 |
0 0.005 −0.006

1
 1 975 1
|0.008 0.1 0 |
𝑃2 = 0 −0.56 −0.006 = 353.5593 𝑀𝑊
1 1 1
|0.008 −0.005 0 |
0 0.005 −0.006

1 1 975
|0.008 −0.005 0.1 |
𝑃3 = 0 0.005 −0.56 = 387.9661 𝑀𝑊
1 1 1
|0.008 −0.005 0 |
0 0.005 −0.006

From equation (1), we get: 𝜆 = 9.0678 $/𝑀𝑊ℎ

We can see that: 𝑃3 > 𝑃3𝑚𝑎𝑥 , hence this solution is not accepted.

We put 𝑃3 = 𝑃3𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 300 𝑀𝑊 and form the new Lagrangian as follows:

𝐹 = 𝐶1 (𝑃1 ) + 𝐶2 (𝑃2 ) + 𝐶3 (𝑃3 ) + 𝜆(𝑃𝐷 − 𝑃1 − 𝑃2 − 𝑃3 ) + 𝛾3 (𝑃3 − 300)

Carrying out the same procedure above we get the following equations:
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 0.008 ∗ 𝑃1 + 7.2 − 𝜆 = 0 … (7)
𝜕𝑃1
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 0.005 ∗ 𝑃2 + 7.3 − 𝜆 = 0 … (8)
𝜕𝑃2
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 0.006 ∗ 𝑃3 + 6.74 − 𝜆 + 𝛾3 = 0 … (9)
𝜕𝑃3
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 𝑃1 + 𝑃2 + 𝑃3 − 975 = 0 … (10)
𝜕𝜆
Manipulating these equations as above, we get:
𝑷𝟏 = 𝟐𝟔𝟕. 𝟑𝟎𝟕𝟕 𝑴𝑾, 𝑷𝟐 = 𝟒𝟎𝟕. 𝟔𝟗𝟐𝟑 𝑴𝑾, 𝑷𝟑 = 𝟑𝟎𝟎 𝑴𝑾, 𝝀 = 𝟗. 𝟑𝟑𝟖𝟓 $/𝑴𝑾𝒉
Checking for generator no.3, the incremental cost is:
𝒅𝑪𝟑
= 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟔 ∗ 𝑷𝟑 + 𝟔. 𝟕𝟒 = 𝟖. 𝟓𝟒 $/𝑴𝑾𝒉 < 𝝀
𝒅𝑷𝟑
Which is the requirement for optimality.
We can also get the incremental cost for generators no.1 and 2 (the same as the system
marginal cost 𝜆) as follows:
𝒅𝑪𝟏 𝒅𝑪𝟐
= = 𝝀 = 𝟗. 𝟑𝟑𝟖𝟓 $/𝑴𝑾𝒉
𝒅𝑷𝟏 𝒅𝑷𝟐
2
Problem 2:
𝐶1 (𝑃1 ) = 0.004𝑃12 + 6𝑃1 + 400
𝐶2 (𝑃2 ) = 𝛼𝑃22 + 𝛽𝑃2 + 500

Forming the Lagrangian as follows:

𝐹 = 𝐶1 (𝑃1 ) + 𝐶2 (𝑃2 ) + 𝜆(𝑃𝐷 − 𝑃1 − 𝑃2 )

Assuming generators are operating on optimal economic dispatch, conditions for optimality
(KKT conditions) are:
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 0.008 ∗ 𝑃1 + 6 − 𝜆 = 0 … (1)
𝜕𝑃1
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 2𝛼 ∗ 𝑃2 + 𝛽 − 𝜆 = 0 … (2)
𝜕𝑃2

For 𝑃𝐷 = 550 𝑀𝑊 and 𝜆 = 8 $/𝑀𝑊ℎ:

From equation (1) we get: 𝑃1 = 250 𝑀𝑊. Hence, 𝑃2 = 300 𝑀𝑊 and hence equation (2)
becomes:

600𝛼 + 𝛽 = 8 … (3)

For 𝑃𝐷 = 1300 𝑀𝑊 and 𝜆 = 10 $/𝑀𝑊ℎ:

From equation (1) we get: 𝑃1 = 500 𝑀𝑊. Hence, 𝑃2 = 800 𝑀𝑊 and hence equation (2)
becomes:

1600𝛼 + 𝛽 = 10 … (4)

Solving equations (3) & (4) simultaneously, we get:

𝜶 = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟐
𝜷 = 𝟔. 𝟖

3
Problem 3:
𝐶1 (𝑃1 ) = 5.3𝑃1 + 500, 200 ≤ 𝑃1 ≤ 450
𝐶2 (𝑃2 ) = 5.5𝑃2 + 500, 150 ≤ 𝑃2 ≤ 350
𝐶3 (𝑃3 ) = 5.8𝑃3 + 500, 100 ≤ 𝑃3 ≤ 225
𝑃𝐷 = 800 𝑀𝑊
First, we form the Lagrangian:

𝐹 = 𝐶1 (𝑃1 ) + 𝐶2 (𝑃2 ) + 𝐶3 (𝑃3 ) + 𝜆(𝑃𝐷 − 𝑃1 − 𝑃2 − 𝑃3 )

Conditions for optimality (KKT conditions) are:

𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 5.3 − 𝜆 = 0 … (1)
𝜕𝑃1
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 5.5 − 𝜆 = 0 … (2)
𝜕𝑃2
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 5.8 − 𝜆 = 0 … (3)
𝜕𝑃3
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 𝑃1 + 𝑃2 + 𝑃3 − 800 = 0 … (4)
𝜕𝜆

From equations (1), (2) and (3), we get three different values of 𝜆. Hence, these equations
cannot lead to a solution.

Considering the first-order cost functions given, we get that generator no.1 is the cheapest
generator while generator no.3 is the most expensive. Hence, we will assume generator no.1
is providing maximum power (𝑃1 = 𝑃1𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 450 𝑀𝑊) and generator no.3 is providing
minimum power (𝑃3 = 𝑃3𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 100 𝑀𝑊). So, the Lagrangian becomes:

𝐹 = 𝐶1 (𝑃1 ) + 𝐶2 (𝑃2 ) + 𝐶3 (𝑃3 ) + 𝜆(𝑃𝐷 − 𝑃1 − 𝑃2 − 𝑃3 ) + 𝛾1 (𝑃1 − 𝑃1𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) + 𝜇3 (𝑃3𝑚𝑖𝑛 − 𝑃3 )

And the KKT conditions become:

𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 5.3 − 𝜆 + 𝛾1 = 0 … (5)
𝜕𝑃1
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 5.5 − 𝜆 = 0 … (6)
𝜕𝑃2
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 5.8 − 𝜆 − 𝜇3 = 0 … (7)
𝜕𝑃3
4
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 𝑃1 + 𝑃2 + 𝑃3 − 800 = 0 … (8)
𝜕𝜆

Manipulating these equations, we get:

𝑷𝟏 = 𝟒𝟓𝟎 𝑴𝑾, 𝑷𝟐 = 𝟐𝟓𝟎 𝑴𝑾, 𝑷𝟑 = 𝟏𝟎𝟎 𝑴𝑾, 𝝀 = 𝟓. 𝟓 $/𝑴𝑾𝒉

Checking incremental cost of generator no.1:

𝑑𝐶1
= 5.3 $/𝑀𝑊ℎ < 𝜆
𝑑𝑃1

Checking incremental cost of generator no.3:

𝑑𝐶3
= 5.8 $/𝑀𝑊ℎ > 𝜆
𝑑𝑃3

Which is the requirement for optimality.

For generator no.2 incremental cost is the same as system marginal cost:

𝑑𝐶2
= 𝜆 = 5.5 $/𝑀𝑊ℎ
𝑑𝑃2

5
Problem 4:
𝑑𝐶1
= 0.008 ∗ 𝑃1 + 8
𝑑𝑃1

𝑑𝐶2
= 0.012 ∗ 𝑃2 + 9
𝑑𝑃2

𝑃1 = 𝑃2 = 500 𝑀𝑊

𝐼𝐿𝐹2 = 0.2

For economic dispatch condition, the following applies:

𝑑𝐶1 𝑑𝐶2
𝑃𝐹1 ∗ = 𝑃𝐹2 ∗ =𝜆
𝑑𝑃1 𝑑𝑃2

So,

1
𝑃𝐹1 ∗ 12 = ∗ 15
1 − 𝐼𝐿𝐹2

Hence, we get:

𝑷𝑭𝟏 = 𝟏. 𝟓𝟔𝟐𝟓

6
Problem 5:
𝐶𝐴 (𝑃𝐴 ) = 2.546𝑃𝐴2 + 23.45𝑃𝐴 + 4, 150 ≤ 𝑃𝐴 ≤ 700

𝐶𝐵 (𝑃𝐵 ) = 18.54𝑃𝐵2 + 78.43𝑃𝐵 + 3, 100 ≤ 𝑃𝐵 ≤ 500

𝐶𝐶 (𝑃𝐶 ) = 5.354𝑃𝐶2 + 54.34𝑃𝐶 + 9, 200 ≤ 𝑃𝐶 ≤ 600

𝑃𝐷𝐴 = 425 𝑀𝑊, 𝑃𝐷𝐵 = 320 𝑀𝑊, 𝑃𝐷𝐶 = 400 𝑀𝑊

a. If the utilities are operating independently to supply their respective demands:

𝑪𝑨 = 𝟒𝟔𝟗𝟖𝟒𝟏. 𝟓 $/𝒉𝒓

𝑪𝑩 = 𝟏𝟗𝟐𝟑𝟓𝟗𝟔. 𝟔 $/𝒉𝒓

𝑪𝑪 = 𝟖𝟕𝟖𝟑𝟖𝟓 $/𝒉𝒓

𝒅𝑪𝑨
= 𝟐𝟏𝟖𝟕. 𝟓𝟓 $/𝑴𝑾𝒉
𝒅𝑷𝑨

𝒅𝑪𝑩
= 𝟏𝟏𝟗𝟒𝟒. 𝟎𝟑 $/𝑴𝑾𝒉
𝒅𝑷𝑩

𝒅𝑪𝑪
= 𝟒𝟑𝟑𝟕. 𝟓𝟒 $/𝑴𝑾𝒉
𝒅𝑷𝑪
′
𝐶𝑝𝑜𝑜𝑙 = 𝐶𝐴 + 𝐶𝐵 + 𝐶𝐶 = 3271823.1 $/ℎ𝑟

b. If the utilities coordinate together to operate as a power pool to minimize the total
aggregated cost, then the problem becomes:

𝑀𝑖𝑛 𝐽 = ∑ 𝐶𝑖 (𝑃𝑖 )
𝑖=𝐴

Subject to: 𝑃𝐴 + 𝑃𝐵 + 𝑃𝐶 = 𝑃𝐷 = 1145 𝑀𝑊

And 150 ≤ 𝑃𝐴 ≤ 700, 100 ≤ 𝑃𝐵 ≤ 500, 200 ≤ 𝑃𝐶 ≤ 600

i. We form the Lagrangian as follows:

𝐹 = 𝐶𝐴 (𝑃𝐴 ) + 𝐶𝐵 (𝑃𝐵 ) + 𝐶𝐶 (𝑃𝐶 ) + 𝜆(𝑃𝐷 − 𝑃𝐴 − 𝑃𝐵 − 𝑃𝐶 )

7
KKT conditions will be:

𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 5.092 ∗ 𝑃𝐴 + 23.45 − 𝜆 = 0 … (1)
𝜕𝑃𝐴
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 37.08 ∗ 𝑃𝐵 + 78.43 − 𝜆 = 0 … (2)
𝜕𝑃𝐵

𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 10.708 ∗ 𝑃𝐶 + 54.34 − 𝜆 = 0 … (3)
𝜕𝑃𝐶

𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 𝑃𝐴 + 𝑃𝐵 + 𝑃𝐶 − 1145 = 0 … (4)
𝜕𝜆

From equations (1) & (2), we get:

5.092 ∗ 𝑃𝐴 − 37.08 ∗ 𝑃𝐵 = 54.98 … (5)

From equations (2) & (3), we get:

37.08 ∗ 𝑃𝐵 − 10.708 ∗ 𝑃𝐶 = −24.09 … (6)

Solving equations (4), (5) & (6) using Cramer’s rule:

1145 1 1
| 54.98 −37.08 0 |
𝑃𝐴 = −24.09 37.08 −10.708 = 712.6283 𝑀𝑊
1 1 1
|5.092 −37.08 0 |
0 37.08 −10.708

1 1145 1
|5.092 54.98 0 |
𝑃𝐵 = 0 −24.09 −10.708 = 96.3787 𝑀𝑊
1 1 1
|5.092 −37.08 0 |
0 37.08 −10.708

1 1 1145
|5.092 −37.08 54.98 |
𝑃𝐶 = 0 37.08 −24.09 = 335.993 𝑀𝑊
1 1 1
|5.092 −37.08 0 |
0 37.08 −10.708

We can see that: 𝑃𝐴 > 𝑃𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 and 𝑃𝐵 < 𝑃𝐵𝑚𝑖𝑛 hence this solution is not accepted.

8
Hence, we put 𝑃𝐴 = 𝑃𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 700 𝑀𝑊 and 𝑃𝐵 = 𝑃𝐵𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 100 𝑀𝑊. We form the new
Lagrangian as follows:

𝐹 = 𝐶𝐴 (𝑃𝐴 ) + 𝐶𝐵 (𝑃𝐵 ) + 𝐶𝐶 (𝑃𝐶 ) + 𝜆(𝑃𝐷 − 𝑃𝐴 − 𝑃𝐵 − 𝑃𝐶 ) + 𝛾𝐴 (𝑃𝐴 − 𝑃𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) + 𝜇𝐵 (𝑃𝐵𝑚𝑖𝑛 − 𝑃𝐵 )

Carrying out the same procedure above we get the following equations:
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 5.092 ∗ 𝑃1 + 23.45 − 𝜆 + 𝛾𝐴 = 0 … (7)
𝜕𝑃𝐴
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 37.08 ∗ 𝑃𝐵 + 78.43 − 𝜆 − 𝜇𝐵 = 0 … (8)
𝜕𝑃𝐵
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 10.708 ∗ 𝑃𝐶 + 54.34 − 𝜆 = 0 … (9)
𝜕𝑃𝐶
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 𝑃𝐴 + 𝑃𝐵 + 𝑃𝐶 − 1145 = 0 … (10)
𝜕𝜆
Manipulating these equations as above, we get:
𝑷𝑨 = 𝟕𝟎𝟎 𝑴𝑾, 𝑷𝑩 = 𝟏𝟎𝟎 𝑴𝑾, 𝑷𝑪 = 𝟑𝟒𝟓 𝑴𝑾, 𝝀 = 𝟑𝟕𝟒𝟖. 𝟔 $/𝑴𝑾𝒉
Checking for utility-A, the incremental cost is:
𝒅𝑪𝑨
= 𝟓. 𝟎𝟗𝟐 ∗ 𝑷𝑨 + 𝟐𝟑. 𝟒𝟓 = 𝟑𝟓𝟖𝟕. 𝟖𝟓 $/𝑴𝑾𝒉 < 𝝀
𝒅𝑷𝑨

Checking for utility-B, the incremental cost is:

𝒅𝑪𝑩
= 𝟑𝟕. 𝟎𝟖 ∗ 𝑷𝑩 + 𝟕𝟖. 𝟒𝟑 = 𝟑𝟕𝟖𝟔. 𝟒𝟑 $/𝑴𝑾𝒉 > 𝝀
𝒅𝑷𝑩

Which is the requirement for optimality.

We can also get the incremental cost for utility-C (the same as the pool marginal cost 𝜆)
as follows:
𝒅𝑪𝑪
= 𝟏𝟎. 𝟕𝟎𝟖 ∗ 𝑷𝑪 + 𝟓𝟒. 𝟑𝟒 = 𝟑𝟕𝟒𝟖. 𝟔 $/𝑴𝑾𝒉 = 𝝀
𝒅𝑷𝑪

𝑪𝑨 = 𝟏𝟐𝟔𝟑𝟗𝟓𝟗 $/𝒉𝒓

𝑪𝑩 = 𝟏𝟗𝟑𝟐𝟒𝟔 $/𝒉𝒓

𝑪𝑪 = 𝟔𝟓𝟔𝟎𝟏𝟔. 𝟏𝟓 $/𝒉𝒓
𝑪𝒑𝒐𝒐𝒍 = 𝑪𝑨 + 𝑪𝑩 + 𝑪𝑪 = 𝟐𝟏𝟏𝟑𝟐𝟐𝟏. 𝟏𝟓 $/𝒉𝒓

9
 ′ (𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡 𝑎) − 𝐶𝑝𝑜𝑜𝑙
ii. 𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑙 𝑠𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 = 𝐶𝑝𝑜𝑜𝑙

𝑷𝒐𝒐𝒍 𝒔𝒂𝒗𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒔 = 𝟏𝟏𝟓𝟖𝟔𝟎𝟏. 𝟗𝟓 $/𝒉𝒓

iii. Optimal dispatch of each utility is calculated in part b-I above:

𝑷𝑨 = 𝟕𝟎𝟎 𝑴𝑾, 𝑷𝑩 = 𝟏𝟎𝟎 𝑴𝑾, 𝑷𝑪 = 𝟑𝟒𝟓 𝑴𝑾

iv. The sketch below shows the optimal transactions between the utilities in pool operation:

𝑷𝑨𝑩 = 𝑷𝑫𝑩 − 𝑷𝑩 = 𝟐𝟐𝟎 𝑴𝑾

𝑷𝑨𝑪 = 𝑷𝑫𝑪 − 𝑷𝑪 = 𝟓𝟓 𝑴𝑾

Utility-A Utility-B

PAB = 220 MW
PA = 700 MW PB = 100 MW

PDA = 425 MW PAC = 55 MW

PDB = 320 MW

Utility-C

PC = 345 MW
PDC = 400 MW

10
 Problem 6:
𝐶1 (𝑃1 ) = 0.00253𝑃12 + 3.19𝑃1 + 850, 100 ≤ 𝑃1 ≤ 850
𝐶2 (𝑃2 ) = 0.00325𝑃22 + 5.11𝑃2 + 1687, 100 ≤ 𝑃2 ≤ 600
𝑃𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 (𝑃1 , 𝑃2 ) = 11 ∗ 10−5 𝑃12 + 6 ∗ 10−5 𝑃22 𝑀𝑊
𝑃𝐷 = 1200 𝑀𝑊
The iterative procedure to find the optimal dispatch that minimizes generation cost is as follows:

1. We start with initial guess for 𝑃1 and 𝑃2 . From the cost functions given, we can see that
generator no.2 is more expensive than generator no.1.Hence, our initial guess will be
𝑃1 = 700 𝑀𝑊 and 𝑃2 = 500 𝑀𝑊.
2. Penalty factors are calculated based on the assumed 𝑃1 and 𝑃2 where:
1
𝑃𝐹𝑖 = , 𝑖 = 1, 2
𝜕𝑃
1 − 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠
𝜕𝑃𝑖
3. We calculate the losses.
4. We calculate the required generation to supply the demand and the losses where:
𝑃𝐷′ = 𝑃𝐷 + 𝑃𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠
5. We solve the coordination equations with the demand supply balance equation to get the new
values for 𝑃1 and 𝑃2 (two equations solved simultaneously):
𝑑𝐶1 𝑑𝐶2
𝑃𝐹1 ∗ = 𝑃𝐹2 ∗ =𝜆
𝑑𝑃1 𝑑𝑃2
And,
𝑃1 + 𝑃2 = 𝑃𝐷′
6. Repeat steps 2 to 5 till a fair degree of accuracy is reached.

Applying the above procedure, the following table is constructed:

Iteration P1 P2 Ploss P’D P1new P2new λ

PF1 PF2
number (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) ($/MWh)
1 700 500 1.182 1.0638 68.9 1268.9 809.5385 459.3615 8.6124
2 809.5385 459.3615 1.2167 1.0583 84.75 1284.75 795.091 489.659 8.7763
3 795.091 489.659 1.212 1.0624 83.925 1283.925 799.862 484.063 8.7716
4 799.862 484.063 1.2135 1.0617 84.435 1284.435 798.8563 485.5787 8.7763
5 798.8563 485.5787 1.2132 1.0619 84.3461 1284.3461 799.1024 485.2437 8.7756
6 799.1024 485.2437 1.2133 1.0618 84.37 1284.37 798.9962 485.3738 8.7757
7 798.9962 485.3738 1.2133 1.0618 84.36 1284.36 798.991 485.37 8.7757
8 798.991 485.37

Hence, 𝑷𝟏 = 𝟕𝟗𝟖. 𝟗𝟗𝟏 𝑴𝑾, 𝑷𝟐 = 𝟒𝟖𝟓. 𝟑𝟕 𝑴𝑾

11
Problem 7:
𝑑𝐶1
= 0.00643𝑃1 + 3.37
𝑑𝑃1
𝑑𝐶2
= 0.00364𝑃2 + 7.19
𝑑𝑃2

𝑃𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 = 0.00011𝑃12 + 0.00006𝑃22 + 0.0045𝑃1 𝑃2

𝜆 = 30 $/𝑀𝑊ℎ
For optimal dispatch, the following equations apply:

𝑑𝐶1 𝑑𝐶2
𝑃𝐹1 ∗ = 𝑃𝐹2 ∗ =𝜆
𝑑𝑃1 𝑑𝑃2
Where:
1 1
𝑃𝐹1 = =
𝜕𝑃 1 − 0.00022𝑃1 − 0.0045𝑃2
1 − 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠
𝜕𝑃1
And,
1 1
𝑃𝐹2 = =
𝜕𝑃 1 − 0.00012𝑃2 − 0.0045𝑃1
1 − 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠
𝜕𝑃2
So,
0.00643𝑃1 + 3.37
= 30 … (1)
1 − 0.00022𝑃1 − 0.0045𝑃2

And,

0.00364𝑃2 + 7.19
= 30 … (2)
1 − 0.00012𝑃2 − 0.0045𝑃1

Solving equations (1) & (2) simultaneously, we get:

𝑷𝟏 = 𝟏𝟓𝟗. 𝟐𝟎𝟖𝟏 𝑴𝑾
𝑷𝟐 = 𝟏𝟖𝟏. 𝟖𝟗𝟐𝟕 𝑴𝑾

12
Problem 8:
Reading no. ΔCt ($/hr) ΔP1 ΔP2 ΔP3
1 0 1 1 -2
2 30 1 1 1
3 -20 -3 1 1

For any equal fractions:

If:
𝑎 𝑐 𝑒
= =
𝑏 𝑑 𝑓
then:
𝑎 𝑎+𝑐+𝑒
= … (1)
𝑏 𝑏+𝑑+𝑓
For optimal dispatch, the following applies:
𝑑𝐶1 𝑑𝐶2 𝑑𝐶3
= = =𝜆
𝑑𝑃1 𝑑𝑃2 𝑑𝑃3
Considering small changes in generators output powers (within minutes), then:
∆𝐶1 𝑑𝐶1 ∆𝐶2 𝑑𝐶2 ∆𝐶3 𝑑𝐶3
≈ , ≈ , ≈
∆𝑃1 𝑑𝑃1 ∆𝑃2 𝑑𝑃2 ∆𝑃3 𝑑𝑃3
Hence, the condition of optimality becomes:
∆𝐶1 ∆𝐶2 ∆𝐶3
≈ ≈ =𝜆
∆𝑃1 ∆𝑃2 ∆𝑃3
And using equation (1), the following applied for optimal economic dispatch condition:
∆𝐶1 ∆𝐶2 ∆𝐶3 ∆𝐶𝑡
≈ ≈ ≈ =𝜆
∆𝑃1 ∆𝑃2 ∆𝑃3 ∆𝑃𝑡
1. For data set no.(1):
∆𝐶𝑡 = 0 and ∆𝑃𝑡 = 0, hence:
∆𝐶𝑡 0
=
∆𝑃𝑡 0

Which is an undefined value. We cannot determine the system marginal cost (𝜆).

13
2. For data set no.(2):
∆𝐶𝑡 = 30 and ∆𝑃𝑡 = 3, hence:
∆𝐶𝑡
= 10
∆𝑃𝑡

Which is equal to the system marginal cost (𝜆).

3. However, for data set no.(3):

∆𝐶𝑡 = −20 and ∆𝑃𝑡 = −1, hence:
∆𝐶𝑡
= 20
∆𝑃𝑡

So, from points 2 and 3, the system is not operating at a constant incremental cost within
few minutes. Therefore, system is not on economic dispatch. Jill was correct to say that
Jack is wrong.

14
Problem 9:
𝐸1 (𝑃1 ) = 0.0275𝑃12 + 3.5𝑃1 + 25, 50 ≤ 𝑃1 ≤ 650
𝐸2 (𝑃2 ) = 0.065𝑃22 + 6.2𝑃2 + 48, 30 ≤ 𝑃2 ≤ 400
𝑃𝐷1 = 575 𝑀𝑊
𝑃𝐷2 = 325 𝑀𝑊
When utilities are on a joint operation, the total emissions minimization problem becomes:
2

𝑀𝑖𝑛 𝐽 = ∑ 𝐸𝑖 (𝑃𝑖 )
𝑖=1

Subject to:

𝑃1 + 𝑃2 = 𝑃𝐷 = 575 + 325 = 900 𝑀𝑊 and

50 ≤ 𝑃1 ≤ 650, 30 ≤ 𝑃2 ≤ 400
Hence, we form the Lagrangian as follows:
𝐹 = 𝐸1 (𝑃1 ) + 𝐸2 (𝑃2 ) + 𝜆(𝑃𝐷 − 𝑃1 − 𝑃2 )

Conditions for optimality (KKT conditions) are:

𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 0.055𝑃1 + 3.5 − 𝜆 = 0 … (1)
𝜕𝑃1
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 0.13𝑃2 + 6.2 − 𝜆 = 0 … (2)
𝜕𝑃2
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 𝑃1 + 𝑃2 − 900 = 0 … (3)
𝜕𝜆

From equations (1) & (2), we get:

0.055𝑃1 − 0.13𝑃2 = 2.7 … (4)

Solving equation (3) &(4) simultaneously, we get:

𝑷𝟏 = 𝟔𝟒𝟕. 𝟎𝟐𝟕 𝑴𝑾, 𝑷𝟐 = 𝟐𝟓𝟐. 𝟗𝟕𝟑 𝑴𝑾

And hence we can get the marginal emission:

𝝀 = 𝟑𝟗. 𝟎𝟖𝟔𝟓 𝒌𝒈/𝑴𝑾𝒉

𝝀 is the marginal emission which means the change in the system emissions (objective
function) due to a change by 1 unit (here 1 MW) in the demand.

15
In this case (joint operation), the emissions can be calculated using the values of 𝑃1 and 𝑃2
obtained and we get:
𝑬𝒕𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 = 𝑬𝟏 + 𝑬𝟐 = 𝟏𝟗𝟓𝟕𝟖. 𝟒𝟑𝟐 𝒌𝒈/𝒉𝒓
If the utilities are operating independently, then:
𝑃1 = 𝑃𝐷1 = 575 𝑀𝑊 and 𝑃2 = 𝑃𝐷2 = 325 𝑀𝑊 and we can calculate the total emissions
then:
𝑬′𝒕𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 = 𝑬′𝟏 + 𝑬′𝟐 = 𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟓𝟖. 𝟑𝟏𝟐𝟓 𝒌𝒈/𝒉𝒓
Hence, the total reduction in system emissions because of the joint dispatch is:

∆𝑬 = 𝑬′𝒕𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 − 𝑬𝒕𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 = 𝟒𝟕𝟗. 𝟖𝟖𝟎𝟓 𝒌𝒈/𝒉𝒓

Independent operation Joint operation

Utility-1 generation 𝑷𝟏 (MW) 575 647.027
Utility-2 generation 𝑷𝟐 (MW) 325 252.973
Total emissions 𝑬𝒕𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 (kg/hr) 20058.3125 19578.432
Emission reduction due to
479.8805
joint operation ∆𝑬 (kg/hr)

16
Problem 10:
2
𝐶𝑇𝐻 (𝑃𝑇𝐻 ) = 0.04𝑃𝑇𝐻 + 11𝑃𝑇𝐻 + 100, 30 ≤ 𝑃𝑇𝐻 ≤ 200
𝑞𝐻 (𝑃𝐻 ) = 0.0075𝑃𝐻2 + 25𝑃𝐻 + 300, 0 ≤ 𝑃𝐻 ≤ 250
𝐸𝐻 = 28000 𝑀𝑊ℎ, 𝑃𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = 200 𝑀𝑊 for one week.
The condition for optimum (to minimize the operating cost) is that the thermal unit should
operate at a constant incremental cost for each interval which means that:
∗
𝑃𝑇𝐻 = 𝑃𝑇𝐻 at all intervals, and:

∗
𝑎
𝑃𝑇𝐻 =√
𝑐
Where: 𝑎 = 100 and 𝑐 = 0.04 from the second-order thermal unit cost characteristics
above. Hence:
𝑷∗𝑻𝑯 = 𝟓𝟎 𝑴𝑾
Also,
∗
𝐸𝑇𝐻 = 𝐸𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 − 𝐸𝐻 = 200 ∗ 168 − 28000 = 5600 𝑀𝑊𝐻 = 𝑃𝑇𝐻 ∗ 𝑇𝑇𝐻
Hence,
𝑻𝑻𝑯 = 𝟏𝟏𝟐 𝒉𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔
a. The water discharge when hydro unit is operating with the thermal unit is:
𝑞𝐻1 = 0.0075 ∗ (200 − 50)2 + 25 ∗ (200 − 50) + 300 = 4218.75 𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒. 𝑓𝑡/ℎ𝑟
When only the hydro unit is operating, the water discharge is:
𝑞𝐻2 = 0.0075 ∗ 2002 + 25 ∗ 200 + 300 = 5600 𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒. 𝑓𝑡/ℎ𝑟
Hence, the total water volume discharged over the week is:

𝑽𝑯 = 𝟏𝟏𝟐 ∗ 𝒒𝑯𝟏 + (𝟏𝟔𝟖 − 𝟏𝟏𝟐) ∗ 𝒒𝑯𝟐 = 𝟕𝟖𝟔𝟏𝟎𝟎 𝒂𝒄𝒓𝒆. 𝒇𝒕

b. The new water volume is:

𝑉𝐻1 = 0.95 ∗ 𝑉𝐻 = 746795 𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒. 𝑓𝑡 … (1)

With the same optimal thermal power obtained above (and hence same 𝑞𝐻1 and 𝑞𝐻2
calculated above), this new water volume can be expressed as follows:

𝑉𝐻1 = 𝑇𝑇𝐻1 ∗ 𝑞𝐻1 + (168 − 𝑇𝑇𝐻1 ) ∗ 𝑞𝐻2 … (2)

Where: 𝑇𝑇𝐻1 is the new time that the thermal unit has to operate for.

17
Solving equations (1) & (2) for 𝑇𝑇𝐻1 , we get:

𝑇𝑇𝐻1 = 140.456 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠

So, the thermal unit will have to operate for additional 28.456 hours.

18
Problem 11:
𝐶(𝑃𝑆 ) = 0.0027𝑃𝑆2 + 9𝑃𝑆 + 200, 30 ≤ 𝑃𝑇𝐻 ≤ 400
𝑞(𝑃𝐻 ) = 5.64𝑃𝐻 + 180, 0 ≤ 𝑃𝐻 ≤ 600
𝑄𝑇𝑜𝑡 = 25000 𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒. 𝑓𝑡 over 8-hour load period.
725 𝑀𝑊, ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟 1 − 4
𝑃𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = {
615 𝑀𝑊, ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟 5 − 8
a. The problem is formulated as follows:
2

𝑀𝑖𝑛 𝐽 = ∑ 𝐶(𝑃𝑆𝑖 ) . 𝑛𝑖 = 4 ∗ 𝐶(𝑃𝑆1 ) + 4 ∗ 𝐶(𝑃𝑆2 )

𝑖=1

Subject to: 𝑃𝑆1 + 𝑃𝐻1 = 725 𝑀𝑊 … (1) during hour 1-4.

and 𝑃𝑆2 + 𝑃𝐻2 = 615 𝑀𝑊 … (2) during hour 5-8.
and,
2

∑ 𝑞(𝑃𝐻𝑖 ) . 𝑛𝑖 = 4 ∗ (5.64𝑃𝐻1 + 180) + 4 ∗ (5.64𝑃𝐻2 + 180) = 25000 … (3)

𝑖=1

We form the Lagrangian as follows:

𝑭 = 𝟒 ∗ 𝑪(𝑷𝑺𝟏 ) + 𝟒 ∗ 𝑪(𝑷𝑺𝟐 ) + 𝝀𝟏 (𝟕𝟐𝟓 − 𝑷𝑺𝟏 − 𝑷𝑯𝟏 ) + 𝝀𝟐 (𝟔𝟏𝟓 − 𝑷𝑺𝟐 − 𝑷𝑯𝟐 )
+ 𝜸[𝟒 ∗ (𝟓. 𝟔𝟒𝑷𝑯𝟏 + 𝟏𝟖𝟎) + 𝟒 ∗ (𝟓. 𝟔𝟒𝑷𝑯𝟐 + 𝟏𝟖𝟎) − 𝟐𝟓𝟎𝟎𝟎]
The KKT conditions for optimality are developed as follows:
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 𝟒 ∗ (𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟓𝟒 ∗ 𝑷𝑺𝟏 + 𝟗) − 𝝀𝟏 = 𝟎 … (4)
𝜕𝑃𝑆1
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 𝟒 ∗ (𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟓𝟒 ∗ 𝑷𝑺𝟐 + 𝟗) − 𝝀𝟐 = 𝟎 … (5)
𝜕𝑃𝑆2
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → −𝝀𝟏 + 𝟐𝟐. 𝟓𝟔𝜸 = 𝟎 … (6)
𝜕𝑃𝐻1
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → −𝝀𝟐 + 𝟐𝟐. 𝟓𝟔𝜸 = 𝟎 … (7)
𝜕𝑃𝐻2

19
b. 𝜆 − 𝛾 iterative method is used to solve equations (1) to (7) starting with:
𝛾 = 2 $/(𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒. 𝑓𝑡), the following table can be constructed:

Error in
𝜸 𝝀𝟏 𝝀𝟐 𝑷𝑺𝟏 𝑷𝑺𝟐 𝑷𝑯𝟏 𝑷𝑯𝟐
𝑸
($/(acre.ft)) ($/MWh) ($/MWh) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW)
(acre.ft)
2 45.12 45.12 422.222 422.222 302.778 192.778 -12380.267
1.8 40.608 40.608 213.333 213.333 511.667 401.667 -2955.2
1.75 39.48 39.48 161.111 161.111 563.889 453.889 -598.933
1.74 39.2544 39.2544 150.667 150.667 574.333 464.333 -127.68
1.737 39.18672 39.18672 147.533 147.533 577.467 467.467 13.696
1.7373 39.1935 39.1935 147.847 147.847 577.153 467.153 -0.4416

Where:
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 𝑖𝑛 𝑄 = 4 ∗ (5.64𝑃𝐻1 + 180) + 4 ∗ (5.64𝑃𝐻2 + 180) − 25000

When we get a negative value in discharge error, then this means that we are on the
expensive side of shadow price of water (water is underutilized). Hence, we decrease 𝛾.

Hence, the optimal dispatch is:

𝑷𝑺𝟏 = 𝟏𝟒𝟕. 𝟖𝟒𝟕 𝑴𝑾

𝑷𝑺𝟐 = 𝟏𝟒𝟕. 𝟖𝟒𝟕 𝑴𝑾

𝑷𝑯𝟏 = 𝟓𝟕𝟕. 𝟏𝟓𝟑 𝑴𝑾

𝑷𝑯𝟐 = 𝟒𝟔𝟕. 𝟏𝟓𝟑 𝑴𝑾

20
Problem 12:
𝐶(𝑃𝑆 ) = 0.0027𝑃𝑆2 + 9𝑃𝑆 + 200, 30 ≤ 𝑃𝑇𝐻 ≤ 400
𝑞(𝑃𝐻 ) = 0.0075𝑃𝐻2 + 25𝑃𝐻 + 300, 0 ≤ 𝑃𝐻 ≤ 600
𝑄𝑇𝑜𝑡 = 75000 𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒. 𝑓𝑡 over 8-hour load period.
725 𝑀𝑊, ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟 1 − 4
𝑃𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 = {
615 𝑀𝑊, ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟 5 − 8
a. The problem is formulated as follows:
2

𝑀𝑖𝑛 𝐽 = ∑ 𝐶(𝑃𝑆𝑖 ) . 𝑛𝑖 = 4 ∗ 𝐶(𝑃𝑆1 ) + 4 ∗ 𝐶(𝑃𝑆2 )

𝑖=1

Subject to: 𝑃𝑆1 + 𝑃𝐻1 = 725 𝑀𝑊 … (1) during hour 1-4.

and 𝑃𝑆2 + 𝑃𝐻2 = 615 𝑀𝑊 … (2) during hour 5-8.
and,
2
2 2
∑ 𝑞(𝑃𝐻𝑖 ) . 𝑛𝑖 = 4 ∗ (0.0075𝑃𝐻1 + 25𝑃𝐻1 + 300) + 4 ∗ (0.0075𝑃𝐻2 + 25𝑃𝐻2 + 300) = 75000 … (3)
𝑖=1

We form the Lagrangian as follows:

𝑭 = 𝟒 ∗ 𝑪(𝑷𝑺𝟏 ) + 𝟒 ∗ 𝑪(𝑷𝑺𝟐 ) + 𝝀𝟏 (𝟕𝟐𝟓 − 𝑷𝑺𝟏 − 𝑷𝑯𝟏 ) + 𝝀𝟐 (𝟔𝟏𝟓 − 𝑷𝑺𝟐 − 𝑷𝑯𝟐 )
+ 𝜸[𝟒 ∗ (𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟕𝟓𝑷𝟐𝑯𝟏 + 𝟐𝟓𝑷𝑯𝟏 + 𝟑𝟎𝟎) + 𝟒 ∗ (𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟕𝟓𝑷𝟐𝑯𝟐 + 𝟐𝟓𝑷𝑯𝟐 + 𝟑𝟎𝟎) − 𝟕𝟓𝟎𝟎𝟎]

The KKT conditions for optimality are developed as follows:

𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 𝟒 ∗ (𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟓𝟒 ∗ 𝑷𝑺𝟏 + 𝟗) − 𝝀𝟏 = 𝟎 … (4)
𝜕𝑃𝑆1
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → 𝟒 ∗ (𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟓𝟒 ∗ 𝑷𝑺𝟐 + 𝟗) − 𝝀𝟐 = 𝟎 … (5)
𝜕𝑃𝑆2
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → −𝝀𝟏 + 𝟎. 𝟎𝟔𝜸𝑷𝑯𝟏 + 𝟏𝟎𝟎𝜸 = 𝟎 … (6)
𝜕𝑃𝐻1
𝜕𝐹 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑𝑠
=0 → −𝝀𝟐 + 𝟎. 𝟎𝟔𝜸𝑷𝑯𝟐 + 𝟏𝟎𝟎𝜸 = 𝟎 … (7)
𝜕𝑃𝐻2

21
b. 𝜆 − 𝛾 iterative method is used to solve equations (1) to (7) starting with:
𝛾 = 0.35 $/(𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒. 𝑓𝑡) and 𝜆1 = 𝜆2 = 40 $/𝑀𝑊ℎ, the table in the next page can be
constructed:

Where:
2 2
𝐸𝑟𝑟𝑜𝑟 𝑖𝑛 𝑄 = 4 ∗ (0.0075𝑃𝐻1 + 25𝑃𝐻1 + 300) + 4 ∗ (0.0075𝑃𝐻2 + 25𝑃𝐻2 + 300) − 75000

When we get a negative value in discharge error, then this means that we are on the
expensive side of shadow price of water (water is underutilized). Hence, we decrease 𝛾
and vice versa.

Hence, the optimal dispatch is:

𝑷𝑺𝟏 = 𝟑𝟔𝟕. 𝟏𝟑 𝑴𝑾

𝑷𝑺𝟐 = 𝟑𝟏𝟐. 𝟓 𝑴𝑾

𝑷𝑯𝟏 = 𝟑𝟓𝟓. 𝟖𝟗𝟑 𝑴𝑾

𝑷𝑯𝟐 = 𝟑𝟎𝟏. 𝟓𝟔𝟓 𝑴𝑾

22