IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v12y2019i15p2931-d253132.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-optimization of Transmission Maintenance Scheduling and Production Cost Minimization

Author

Listed:
  • Gokturk Poyrazoglu

    (Electrical & Electronics Engineering, Ozyegin University, Çekmeköy 34794, İstanbul, Turkey)

  • HyungSeon Oh

    (Electrical and Computer Engineering, United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, MD 21402, USA)

Abstract

Regular transmission maintenance is important to keep the infrastructure resilient and reliable. Delays providing on-time maintenance increase the forced outage rate of those assets, causing unexpected changes in the operating conditions and even catastrophic consequences, such as local blackouts. The current process of maintenance schedule is based on the transmission owners’ choice, with the final decision of system operator about the reliability. The requests are examined on a first-come, first-served basis, which means a regular maintenance request may be rejected, delaying the tasks that should be performed. To incorporate optimization knowledge into the transmission maintenance schedule, this study focuses on the co-optimization of maintenance scheduling and the production cost minimization. The mathematical model co-optimizes generation unit commitment and line maintenance scheduling while maintaining N-1 reliability criterion. Three case studies focusing on reliability, renewable energy delivery, and service efficiency are conducted leading up to 4% production cost savings as compared to the business-as-usual approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Gokturk Poyrazoglu & HyungSeon Oh, 2019. "Co-optimization of Transmission Maintenance Scheduling and Production Cost Minimization," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:12:y:2019:i:15:p:2931-:d:253132
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/15/2931/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/15/2931/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tuohy, Aidan & Meibom, Peter & Denny, Eleanor & O'Malley, Mark, 2009. "Unit commitment for systems with significant wind penetration," MPRA Paper 34849, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Froger, Aurélien & Gendreau, Michel & Mendoza, Jorge E. & Pinson, Éric & Rousseau, Louis-Martin, 2016. "Maintenance scheduling in the electricity industry: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(3), pages 695-706.
    3. Johnson, Raymond B. & Oren, Shmuel S. & Svoboda, Alva J., 1997. "Equity and efficiency of unit commitment in competitive electricity markets," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 9-19, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pavel Y. Gubin & Vladislav P. Oboskalov & Anatolijs Mahnitko & Roman Petrichenko, 2020. "Simulated Annealing, Differential Evolution and Directed Search Methods for Generator Maintenance Scheduling," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-26, October.
    2. Piotr F. Borowski, 2020. "Zonal and Nodal Models of Energy Market in European Union," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-21, August.
    3. Xiaojing Hu & Haoling Min & Sai Dai & Zhi Cai & Xiaonan Yang & Qiang Ding & Zhanyong Yang & Feng Xiao, 2022. "Research on Maintenance Strategies for Different Transmission Sections to Improve the Consumption Rate Based on a Renewable Energy Production Simulation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-11, December.

    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. Després, Jacques & Hadjsaid, Nouredine & Criqui, Patrick & Noirot, Isabelle, 2015. "Modelling the impacts of variable renewable sources on the power sector: Reconsidering the typology of energy modelling tools," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 486-495.
    2. Tim Felling & Björn Felten & Paul Osinski & Christoph Weber, 2023. "Assessing Improved Price Zones in Europe: Flow-Based Market Coupling in Central Western Europe in Focus," The Energy Journal, , vol. 44(6), pages 71-112, November.
    3. Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & MacGill, Iain F., 2013. "Assessing the value of wind generation in future carbon constrained electricity industries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 400-412.
    4. Osório, G.J. & Lujano-Rojas, J.M. & Matias, J.C.O. & Catalão, J.P.S., 2015. "A probabilistic approach to solve the economic dispatch problem with intermittent renewable energy sources," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 949-959.
    5. Bingke Yan & Bo Wang & Lin Zhu & Hesen Liu & Yilu Liu & Xingpei Ji & Dichen Liu, 2015. "A Novel, Stable, and Economic Power Sharing Scheme for an Autonomous Microgrid in the Energy Internet," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-24, November.
    6. Katrin Trepper & Michael Bucksteeg & Christoph Weber, 2013. "An integrated approach to model redispatch and to assess potential benefits from market splitting in Germany," EWL Working Papers 1319, University of Duisburg-Essen, Chair for Management Science and Energy Economics, revised Apr 2014.
    7. Fischer, Ronald & Serra, Pablo, 2003. "Energy prices in the presence of plant indivisibilities," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 303-314, July.
    8. Nyamdash, Batsaikhan & Denny, Eleanor, 2013. "The impact of electricity storage on wholesale electricity prices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 6-16.
    9. Thomas Bittar & Pierre Carpentier & Jean-Philippe Chancelier & Jérôme Lonchampt, 2022. "A decomposition method by interaction prediction for the optimization of maintenance scheduling," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 316(1), pages 229-267, September.
    10. Lamadrid, Alberto J. & Mount, Tim, 2012. "Ancillary services in systems with high penetrations of renewable energy sources, the case of ramping," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1959-1971.
    11. Ramteen Sioshansi & Emma Nicholson, 2011. "Towards equilibrium offers in unit commitment auctions with nonconvex costs," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 41-61, August.
    12. Sven de Vries & Rakesh Vohra, 2000. "Combinatorial Auctions: A Survey," Discussion Papers 1296, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    13. Ying-Yi Hong & Gerard Francesco DG. Apolinario, 2021. "Uncertainty in Unit Commitment in Power Systems: A Review of Models, Methods, and Applications," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-47, October.
    14. Xiaohua Zhang & Jun Xie & Zhengwei Zhu & Jianfeng Zheng & Hao Qiang & Hailong Rong, 2016. "Smart Grid Cost-Emission Unit Commitment via Co-Evolutionary Agents," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-13, October.
    15. Andrychowicz, Mateusz & Olek, Blazej & Przybylski, Jakub, 2017. "Review of the methods for evaluation of renewable energy sources penetration and ramping used in the Scenario Outlook and Adequacy Forecast 2015. Case study for Poland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 703-714.
    16. Hoseini, Naghi & Sheikholeslami, Abdolreza & Barforoushi, Taghi & Latify, Mohammad Amin, 2020. "Preventive maintenance mid-term scheduling of resources in multi-carrier energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    17. Abdul Rauf & Mahmoud Kassas & Muhammad Khalid, 2022. "Data-Driven Optimal Battery Storage Sizing for Grid-Connected Hybrid Distributed Generations Considering Solar and Wind Uncertainty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-27, September.
    18. Felten, Björn & Weber, Christoph, 2018. "The value(s) of flexible heat pumps – Assessment of technical and economic conditions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 1292-1319.
    19. Misconel, S. & Leisen, R. & Mikurda, J. & Zimmermann, F. & Fraunholz, C. & Fichtner, W. & Möst, D. & Weber, C., 2022. "Systematic comparison of high-resolution electricity system modeling approaches focusing on investment, dispatch and generation adequacy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    20. repec:dui:wpaper:1305 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. De Vos, K. & Stevens, N. & Devolder, O. & Papavasiliou, A. & Hebb, B. & Matthys-Donnadieu, J., 2019. "Dynamic dimensioning approach for operating reserves: Proof of concept in Belgium," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 272-285.

    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:12:y:2019:i:15:p:2931-:d:253132. 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.