Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers in Energy

ISSN 2095-1701

ISSN 2095-1698(Online)

CN 11-6017/TK

Postal Subscription Code 80-972

2018 Impact Factor: 1.701

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front. Energy    2016, Vol. 10 Issue (2) : 240-248    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-016-0404-z
RESEARCH ARTICLE
An approach to locational marginal price based zonal congestion management in deregulated electricity market
Md SARWAR(),Anwar Shahzad SIDDIQUI
Department of Electrical Engineering, Jamia Millia Islamia (A Central University), New Delhi 110025, India
 Download: PDF(570 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Congestion of transmission line is a vital issue and its management pose a technical challenge in power system deregulation. Congestion occurs in deregulated electricity market when transmission capacity is not sufficient to simultaneously accommodate all constraints of power transmission through a line. Therefore, to manage congestion, a locational marginal price (LMP) based zonal congestion management approach in a deregulated electricity market has been proposed in this paper. As LMP is an economic indicator and its difference between two buses across a transmission line provides the measure of the degree of congestion, therefore, it is efficiently and reliably used in deregulated electricity market for congestion management. This paper utilizes the difference of LMP across a transmission line to categorize various congestion zones in the system. After the identification of congestion zones, distributed generation is optimally placed in most congestion sensitive zones using LMP difference in order to manage congestion. The performance of the proposed methodology has been tested on the IEEE 14-bus system and IEEE 57-bus system.
Keywords locational marginal price (LMP)      distributed generation      pool market      deregulated electricity market      congestion management     
Corresponding Author(s): Md SARWAR   
Just Accepted Date: 16 March 2016   Online First Date: 18 April 2016    Issue Date: 27 May 2016
 Cite this article:   
Md SARWAR,Anwar Shahzad SIDDIQUI. An approach to locational marginal price based zonal congestion management in deregulated electricity market[J]. Front. Energy, 2016, 10(2): 240-248.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fie/EN/10.1007/s11708-016-0404-z
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fie/EN/Y2016/V10/I2/240
Line No. From bus to bus LMP difference/($•MWh–1) Line No. From bus to bus LMP difference/($•MWh–1)
1 1–2 11.5 11 6–11 1.0
2 1–5 12.5 12 6–12 0.6
3 2–3 16.7 13 6–13 0.9
4 2–4 3.7 14 7–8 0.0
5 2–5 1.0 15 7–9 0.1
6 3–4 13.0 16 9–10 0.1
7 4–5 2.6 17 9–14 0.3
8 4–7 0.2 18 10–11 0.8
9 4–9 0.3 19 12–13 0.3
10 5–6 0.4 20 13–14 1.3
Tab.1  LMP difference across lines for IEEE 14-bus system
Congestion zones Bus No.
Zone 1 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5
Zone 2 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14
Tab.2  Congestion zone identification based on LMP difference for IEEE 14-bus system
Fig.1  Congestion zone identification based on LMP difference for IEEE 14-bus system
DG location System generation cost/($•h–1) System congestion cost/($•h–1)
Without DG 6353.65 2116.84
Bus 4 6193.58 2071.95
Tab.3  Results for IEEE 14-bus system
Congestion zones DG location System generation cost/($•h–1)
Zone 1 Bus 4 6173.58
Zone 1 Bus 5 6192.82
Zone 2 Bus 14 6197.10
Tab.4  Generation cost for IEEE 14-bus system in different zones
Fig.2  Generation cost for IEEE 14-bus system
Line No. From bus to bus LMP difference/($•MWh–1) Line No. From bus to bus LMP difference/($•MWh–1) Line No. From bus to bus LMP difference/($•MWh–1)
1 1–2 0.55 28 14–15 1.08 55 41–42 2.63
2 2–3 3.04 29 18–19 2.32 56 41–43 0.3
3 3–4 1.16 30 19–20 0.56 57 38–44 0.75
4 4–5 1.35 31 21–20 0.2 58 15–45 0.46
5 4–6 1.63 32 21–22 0.03 59 14–46 0.21
6 6–7 8.09 33 22–23 0.27 60 46–47 1.11
7 6–8 8.79 34 23–24 3.5 61 47–48 0.33
8 8–9 4.36 35 24–25 0.39 62 48–49 0.41
9 9–10 3.26 36 24–25 0.39 63 49–50 0.59
10 9–11 2 37 24–26 0.64 64 50–51 1.62
11 9–12 4.83 38 26–27 1.29 65 10–51 0.09
12 9–13 3.1 39 27–28 0.14 66 13–49 1.09
13 13–14 0.15 40 28–29 0.35 67 29–52 0.16
14 13–15 1.23 41 7–29 1.42 68 52–53 0.3
15 1–15 3.83 42 25–30 1.03 69 53–54 4.78
16 1–16 5.37 43 30–31 1.22 70 54–55 4.98
17 1–17 21.58 44 31–32 1.87 71 11–43 0.1
18 3–15 0.25 45 32–33 0.18 72 44–45 2.28
19 4–18 0.06 46 33–32 1.35 73 40–56 0.9
20 4–18 0.06 47 32–35 0.52 74 56–41 3.78
21 5–6 0.29 48 35–36 0.7 75 56–42 1.15
22 7–8 16.88 49 36–37 0.48 76 39–57 0.27
23 10–12 1.57 50 37–38 1.24 77 57–56 0.75
24 11–13 1.1 51 37–39 0.07 78 38–49 1.18
25 12–13 1.73 52 36–40 0.01 79 38–48 0.77
26 12–16 1.42 53 22–38 0.53 80 9–55 1.19
27 12–17 14.8 54 11–41 0.41
Tab.5  LMP difference across lines for IEEE 57-bus system
Congestion zones Bus No.
Zone 1 1, 12, 13,14, 15, 16, 17, 44, and 45
Zone 2 6, 7, 8, 9, 52, 53, 54, and 55
Zone 3 2, 3, 4, 5, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 29
Zone 4 10, 11, 30,31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 56, and 57
Tab.6  Congestion zone identification based on LMP difference for IEEE 57-bus system
Fig.3  Congestion zones identification based on LMP difference for IEEE 57-bus system
DG location System generation cost/($•h–1) System congestion cost/($•h–1)
Without DG 41920.8 4610.11
Bus 17 41638.6 3584.39
Tab.7  Results for IEEE 57-bus system
Congestion zones DG location System generation cost/($•h–1)
Zone 1 Bus 17 41638.56
Zone 2 Bus 7 41665.97
Zone 3 Bus 23 41670.85
Zone 4 Bus 56 41671.9
Tab.8  Generation cost for IEEE 57-bus system in different zones
Fig.4  Generation cost for IEEE 57-bus system
1 Christie R D, Wollenberg B F, Wangensteen I. Transmission management in the deregulated environment. Proceedings of the IEEE, 2000, 88(2): 170–195
https://doi.org/10.1109/5.823997
2 Kumar A, Srivastava S C, Singh S N. Congestion management in competitive power market: a bibliographical survey. Electric Power Systems Research, 2005, 76(1-3): 153–164
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2005.05.001
3 Lo K L, Yuen Y S, Snider L A. Congestion management in deregulated electricity markets. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and Power Technologies. London, UK, 2000, 47–52
4 Dutta S, Singh S P. Optimal rescheduling of generators for congestion management based on particle swarm optimization. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2008, 23(4): 1560–1569
https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2008.922647
5 Siddiqui A S, Sarwar M, Ahsan S. Congestion Management using improved inertia weight particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of IEEE Power India International Conference (PIICON). New Delhi, India, 2014, 1–5
6 Fang R S, David A K. Transmission congestion management in an electricity market. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 1999, 14(3): 877–883
https://doi.org/10.1109/59.780898
7 Fang R S, David A K. Optimal dispatch under transmission contracts. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 1999, 14(2): 732–737
https://doi.org/10.1109/59.761905
8 Singh S N, David A K. Optimal location of FACTS devices for congestion management. Electric Power Systems Research, 2001, 58(2): 71–79
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7796(01)00087-6
9 Acharya N, Mithulananthan N. Locating series FACTS devices for congestion management in deregulated electricity markets. Electric Power Systems Research, 2007, 77(3-4): 352–360
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2006.03.016
10 Afkousi-Paqaleh M, Abbaspour-Tehrani Fard A, Rashidinejad M. Distributed generation placement for congestion management considering economical and financial issues. Electrical Engineering, 2010, 92(6): 193–201
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00202-010-0175-1
11 Yu C N, Ilic M D. Congestion clusters-based markets for transmission management. In: Winter Meeting of IEEE Power Engineering Society. New York, USA, 1999, 1–11
12 Kumar A, Srivastava S C, Singh S N. A zonal congestion management approach using real and reactive power rescheduling. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2004, 19(1): 554–562
https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2003.821448
13 Kumar A, Srivastava S C, Singh S N. A zonal congestion management approach using ac transmission congestion distribution factors. Electric Power Systems Research, 2004, 72(1): 85–93
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2004.03.011
14 Fu Y, Li Z. Different models and properties on LMP calculations. In: IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, Montreal, Canada, 2006, 1–9
15 Shahidehpour M, Yamin H, Li Z. Market Operations in Electric Power Systems. New York: Wiley, 2002
16 Jain R, Siddiqui A S, Jamil M, Gupta C P, Preeti. A strategy for FTR bidding in deregulated electricity markets. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, 2014, 1–12
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-014-0275-9
17 Rahimi F, Ipakchi A. Demand response as a market resource under smart grid paradigm. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 2010, 1(1): 82–88
https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2010.2045906
18 De Oliveira E I, Marangon Lima I W, De Almeida K C. Allocation of FACTS devices in hydro-thermal systems. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2000, 15(1): 276–282
https://doi.org/10.1109/59.852133
19 Gautam D, Mithulananthan N. Optimal DG placement in deregulated electricity market. Electric Power Systems Research, 2007, 77(12): 1627–1636
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epsr.2006.11.014
20 Singh K, Yadav V K, Padhy N P, Sharma J. Congestion management considering optimal placement of distributed generator in deregulated power system networks. Electric Power Components and Systems, 2014, 42(1): 13–22
https://doi.org/10.1080/15325008.2013.843218
[1] Mehrdad TARAFDAR HAGH,Homayoun EBRAHIMIAN,Noradin GHADIMI. Hybrid intelligent water drop bundled wavelet neural network to solve the islanding detection by inverter-based DG[J]. Front. Energy, 2015, 9(1): 75-90.
[2] Ashwani KUMAR, Charan SEKHAR. Demand response based congestion management in a mix of pool and bilateral electricity market model[J]. Front Energ, 2012, 6(2): 164-178.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed