IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i5p1269-d505723.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benchmarking Flexible Electric Loads Scheduling Algorithms

Author

Listed:
  • Koos van der Linden

    (Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Van Mourik Broekmanweg 6, 2628 XE Delft, The Netherlands)

  • Natalia Romero

    (Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Van Mourik Broekmanweg 6, 2628 XE Delft, The Netherlands)

  • Mathijs M. de Weerdt

    (Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics and Computer Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Van Mourik Broekmanweg 6, 2628 XE Delft, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Due to increasing numbers of intermittent and distributed generators in power systems, there is an increasing need for demand responses to maintain the balance between electricity generation and use at all times. For example, the electrification of transportation significantly adds to the amount of flexible electricity demand. Several methods have been developed to schedule such flexible energy consumption. However, an objective way of comparing these methods is lacking, especially when decisions are made based on incomplete information which is repeatedly updated. This paper presents a new benchmarking framework designed to bridge this gap. Surveys that classify flexibility planning algorithms were an input to define this benchmarking standard. The benchmarking framework can be used for different objectives and under diverse conditions faced by electricity production stakeholders interested in flexibility scheduling algorithms. Our contribution was implemented in a software toolbox providing a simulation environment that captures the evolution of look-ahead information, which enables comparing online planning and scheduling algorithms. This toolbox includes seven planning algorithms. This paper includes two case studies measuring the performances of these algorithms under uncertain market conditions. These case studies illustrate the importance of online decision making, the influence of data quality on the performance of the algorithms, the benefit of using robust and stochastic programming approaches, and the necessity of trustworthy benchmarking.

Suggested Citation

  • Koos van der Linden & Natalia Romero & Mathijs M. de Weerdt, 2021. "Benchmarking Flexible Electric Loads Scheduling Algorithms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-16, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:5:p:1269-:d:505723
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/5/1269/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/5/1269/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alipour, Manijeh & Mohammadi-Ivatloo, Behnam & Moradi-Dalvand, Mohammad & Zare, Kazem, 2017. "Stochastic scheduling of aggregators of plug-in electric vehicles for participation in energy and ancillary service markets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 1168-1179.
    2. João Soares & Tiago Pinto & Fernando Lezama & Hugo Morais, 2018. "Survey on Complex Optimization and Simulation for the New Power Systems Paradigm," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-32, August.
    3. Li, Hongyan & Tesfatsion, Leigh S., 2009. "The AMES Wholesale Power Market Test Bed: A Computational Laboratory for Research, Teaching, and Training," Staff General Research Papers Archive 13073, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Connolly, D. & Lund, H. & Mathiesen, B.V. & Leahy, M., 2010. "A review of computer tools for analysing the integration of renewable energy into various energy systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 1059-1082, April.
    5. Brijs, Tom & De Jonghe, Cedric & Hobbs, Benjamin F. & Belmans, Ronnie, 2017. "Interactions between the design of short-term electricity markets in the CWE region and power system flexibility," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 36-51.
    6. Ringkjøb, Hans-Kristian & Haugan, Peter M. & Solbrekke, Ida Marie, 2018. "A review of modelling tools for energy and electricity systems with large shares of variable renewables," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 440-459.
    7. Antimo Barbato & Antonio Capone, 2014. "Optimization Models and Methods for Demand-Side Management of Residential Users: A Survey," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-38, September.
    8. Antonio J. Conejo & Miguel Carrión & Juan M. Morales, 2010. "Decision Making Under Uncertainty in Electricity Markets," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-1-4419-7421-1, September.
    9. Fabian Dunke & Stefan Nickel, 2017. "Evaluating the quality of online optimization algorithms by discrete event simulation," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 25(4), pages 831-858, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maria Taljegard & Lisa Göransson & Mikael Odenberger & Filip Johnsson, 2021. "To Represent Electric Vehicles in Electricity Systems Modelling—Aggregated Vehicle Representation vs. Individual Driving Profiles," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-25, January.
    2. Gils, Hans Christian & Gardian, Hedda & Kittel, Martin & Schill, Wolf-Peter & Zerrahn, Alexander & Murmann, Alexander & Launer, Jann & Fehler, Alexander & Gaumnitz, Felix & van Ouwerkerk, Jonas & Bußa, 2022. "Modeling flexibility in energy systems — comparison of power sector models based on simplified test cases," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    3. Theresa Liegl & Simon Schramm & Philipp Kuhn & Thomas Hamacher, 2023. "Considering Socio-Technical Parameters in Energy System Models—The Current Status and Next Steps," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-19, October.
    4. Wiese, Frauke & Schlecht, Ingmar & Bunke, Wolf-Dieter & Gerbaulet, Clemens & Hirth, Lion & Jahn, Martin & Kunz, Friedrich & Lorenz, Casimir & Mühlenpfordt, Jonathan & Reimann, Juliane & Schill, Wolf-P, 2019. "Open Power System Data – Frictionless data for electricity system modelling," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 401-409.
    5. Homa Rashidizadeh-Kermani & Hamid Reza Najafi & Amjad Anvari-Moghaddam & Josep M. Guerrero, 2018. "Optimal Decision-Making Strategy of an Electric Vehicle Aggregator in Short-Term Electricity Markets," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-20, September.
    6. Chang, Miguel & Lund, Henrik & Thellufsen, Jakob Zinck & Østergaard, Poul Alberg, 2023. "Perspectives on purpose-driven coupling of energy system models," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    7. Ringkjøb, Hans-Kristian & Haugan, Peter M. & Nybø, Astrid, 2020. "Transitioning remote Arctic settlements to renewable energy systems – A modelling study of Longyearbyen, Svalbard," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    8. Yazdanie, M. & Orehounig, K., 2021. "Advancing urban energy system planning and modeling approaches: Gaps and solutions in perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    9. Besagni, Giorgio & Borgarello, Marco & Premoli Vilà, Lidia & Najafi, Behzad & Rinaldi, Fabio, 2020. "MOIRAE – bottom-up MOdel to compute the energy consumption of the Italian REsidential sector: Model design, validation and evaluation of electrification pathways," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    10. Gabrielli, Paolo & Gazzani, Matteo & Martelli, Emanuele & Mazzotti, Marco, 2018. "Optimal design of multi-energy systems with seasonal storage," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 408-424.
    11. Plazas-Niño, F.A. & Ortiz-Pimiento, N.R. & Montes-Páez, E.G., 2022. "National energy system optimization modelling for decarbonization pathways analysis: A systematic literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    12. Charlotte Senkpiel & Audrey Dobbins & Christina Kockel & Jan Steinbach & Ulrich Fahl & Farina Wille & Joachim Globisch & Sandra Wassermann & Bert Droste-Franke & Wolfgang Hauser & Claudia Hofer & Lars, 2020. "Integrating Methods and Empirical Findings from Social and Behavioural Sciences into Energy System Models—Motivation and Possible Approaches," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-30, September.
    13. Thomas Heggarty & Jean-Yves Bourmaud & Robin Girard & Georges Kariniotakis, 2024. "Assessing the relative impacts of maximum investment rate and temporal detail in capacity expansion models applied to power systems," Post-Print hal-04383397, HAL.
    14. Prina, Matteo Giacomo & Nastasi, Benedetto & Groppi, Daniele & Misconel, Steffi & Garcia, Davide Astiaso & Sparber, Wolfram, 2022. "Comparison methods of energy system frameworks, models and scenario results," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    15. El-Sayed, Ahmed Hassan A. & Khalil, Adel & Yehia, Mohamed, 2023. "Modeling alternative scenarios for Egypt 2050 energy mix based on LEAP analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    16. Ogunmodede, Oluwaseun & Anderson, Kate & Cutler, Dylan & Newman, Alexandra, 2021. "Optimizing design and dispatch of a renewable energy system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 287(C).
    17. Abuzayed, Anas & Hartmann, Niklas, 2022. "MyPyPSA-Ger: Introducing CO2 taxes on a multi-regional myopic roadmap of the German electricity system towards achieving the 1.5 °C target by 2050," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    18. Iacopo Savelli & Bertrand Corn'elusse & Antonio Giannitrapani & Simone Paoletti & Antonio Vicino, 2017. "A New Approach to Electricity Market Clearing With Uniform Purchase Price and Curtailable Block Orders," Papers 1711.07731, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2018.
    19. Beck, J.-P. & Reinhard, J. & Kamps, K. & Kupka, J. & Derksen, C., 2022. "Model experiments in operational energy system analysis: Power grid focused scenario comparisons," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    20. Niwagira Daniel & Juyoul Kim, 2022. "A Study on Integrating SMRs into Uganda’s Future Energy System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-21, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:5:p:1269-:d:505723. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.