IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v12y2019i6p1003-d214041.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Different Interval Lengths in a Rolling Horizon MILP Unit Commitment with Non-Linear Control Model for a Small Energy System

Author

Listed:
  • Gerrit Erichsen

    (Institute of Energy Systems, Hamburg University of Technology, Denickestr. 15, 21073 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Tobias Zimmermann

    (Institute of Energy Systems, Hamburg University of Technology, Denickestr. 15, 21073 Hamburg, Germany)

  • Alfons Kather

    (Institute of Energy Systems, Hamburg University of Technology, Denickestr. 15, 21073 Hamburg, Germany)

Abstract

In this paper, a fixed electricity producer park of both a short- and long-term renewable energy storage (e.g., battery, power to gas to power) and a conventional power plant is combined with an increasing amount of installed volatile renewable power. For the sake of simplicity, the grid is designed as a single copper plate with island restrictions and constant demand of 1000 MW; the volatile input is deducted from scaled 15-min input data of German grid operators. A mixed integer linear programming model is implemented to generate an optimised unit commitment (UCO) for various scenarios and configurations using CPLEX ® as the problem solver. The resulting unit commitment is input into a non-linear control model (NLC), which tries to match the plan of the UCO as closely as possible. Using the approach of a rolling horizon the result of the NLC is fed back to the interval of the next optimisation run. The problem’s objective is set to minimise CO 2 emissions of the whole electricity producer park. Different interval lengths are tested with perfect foresight. The results gained with different interval lengths are compared to each other and to a simple heuristic approach. As non-linear control model a characteristic line model is used. The results show that the influence of the interval length is rather small, which leads to the conclusion that realistic forecast lengths of two days can be used to achieve not only a sufficient quality of solutions, but shorter computational times as well.

Suggested Citation

  • Gerrit Erichsen & Tobias Zimmermann & Alfons Kather, 2019. "Effect of Different Interval Lengths in a Rolling Horizon MILP Unit Commitment with Non-Linear Control Model for a Small Energy System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-24, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:12:y:2019:i:6:p:1003-:d:214041
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/6/1003/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/6/1003/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Palzer, Andreas & Henning, Hans-Martin, 2014. "A comprehensive model for the German electricity and heat sector in a future energy system with a dominant contribution from renewable energy technologies – Part II: Results," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1019-1034.
    2. Schulze, Tim & McKinnon, Ken, 2016. "The value of stochastic programming in day-ahead and intra-day generation unit commitment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 592-605.
    3. Mehleri, E.D. & Sarimveis, H. & Markatos, N.C. & Papageorgiou, L.G., 2013. "Optimal design and operation of distributed energy systems: Application to Greek residential sector," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 331-342.
    4. Voll, Philip & Klaffke, Carsten & Hennen, Maike & Bardow, André, 2013. "Automated superstructure-based synthesis and optimization of distributed energy supply systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 374-388.
    5. Henning, Hans-Martin & Palzer, Andreas, 2014. "A comprehensive model for the German electricity and heat sector in a future energy system with a dominant contribution from renewable energy technologies—Part I: Methodology," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 1003-1018.
    6. Abujarad, Saleh Y. & Mustafa, M.W. & Jamian, J.J., 2017. "Recent approaches of unit commitment in the presence of intermittent renewable energy resources: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 215-223.
    7. Ommen, Torben & Markussen, Wiebke Brix & Elmegaard, Brian, 2014. "Comparison of linear, mixed integer and non-linear programming methods in energy system dispatch modelling," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 109-118.
    8. 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.
    9. Lopion, Peter & Markewitz, Peter & Robinius, Martin & Stolten, Detlef, 2018. "A review of current challenges and trends in energy systems modeling," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 156-166.
    10. Li, Bei & Roche, Robin & Miraoui, Abdellatif, 2017. "Microgrid sizing with combined evolutionary algorithm and MILP unit commitment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 547-562.
    11. Tim Helge Hultberg, 2007. "FLOPC++ An Algebraic Modeling Language Embedded in C++," Operations Research Proceedings, in: Karl-Heinz Waldmann & Ulrike M. Stocker (ed.), Operations Research Proceedings 2006, pages 187-190, Springer.
    12. Tom Brijs & Frederik Geth & Sauleh Siddiqui & Benjamin F. Hobbs & Ronnie Belmans, 2016. "Price-Based Unit Commitment Electricity Storage Arbitrage with Piecewise Linear Price-Effects," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1567, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    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. Klemm, Christian & Wiese, Frauke & Vennemann, Peter, 2023. "Model-based run-time and memory reduction for a mixed-use multi-energy system model with high spatial resolution," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 334(C).
    2. Harun Or Rashid Howlader & Oludamilare Bode Adewuyi & Ying-Yi Hong & Paras Mandal & Ashraf Mohamed Hemeida & Tomonobu Senjyu, 2019. "Energy Storage System Analysis Review for Optimal Unit Commitment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, December.
    3. Jun Hyeok Kang & Jinil Han, 2019. "Optimizing the Operation of Animal Shelters to Minimize Unnecessary Euthanasia: A Case Study in the Seoul Capital Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-13, November.
    4. Rasku, Topi & Miettinen, Jari & Rinne, Erkka & Kiviluoma, Juha, 2020. "Impact of 15-day energy forecasts on the hydro-thermal scheduling of a future Nordic power system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    5. Nima Mirzaei Alavijeh & David Steen & Zack Norwood & Le Anh Tuan & Christos Agathokleous, 2020. "Cost-Effectiveness of Carbon Emission Abatement Strategies for a Local Multi-Energy System—A Case Study of Chalmers University of Technology Campus," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-23, April.
    6. Marcin Pluta & Artur Wyrwa & Wojciech Suwała & Janusz Zyśk & Maciej Raczyński & Stanisław Tokarski, 2020. "A Generalized Unit Commitment and Economic Dispatch Approach for Analysing the Polish Power System under High Renewable Penetration," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-18, April.

    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. Østergaard, P.A. & Lund, H. & Thellufsen, J.Z. & Sorknæs, P. & Mathiesen, B.V., 2022. "Review and validation of EnergyPLAN," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    2. Maximilian Hoffmann & Leander Kotzur & Detlef Stolten & Martin Robinius, 2020. "A Review on Time Series Aggregation Methods for Energy System Models," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-61, February.
    3. Thimet, P.J. & Mavromatidis, G., 2022. "Review of model-based electricity system transition scenarios: An analysis for Switzerland, Germany, France, and Italy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    4. Klemm, Christian & Vennemann, Peter, 2021. "Modeling and optimization of multi-energy systems in mixed-use districts: A review of existing methods and approaches," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    5. Fodstad, Marte & Crespo del Granado, Pedro & Hellemo, Lars & Knudsen, Brage Rugstad & Pisciella, Paolo & Silvast, Antti & Bordin, Chiara & Schmidt, Sarah & Straus, Julian, 2022. "Next frontiers in energy system modelling: A review on challenges and the state of the art," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    6. Urban, Kristof L. & Scheller, Fabian & Bruckner, Thomas, 2021. "Suitability assessment of models in the industrial energy system design," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    7. Md. Nasimul Islam Maruf, 2019. "Sector Coupling in the North Sea Region—A Review on the Energy System Modelling Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-35, November.
    8. 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.
    9. 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).
    10. Kotzur, Leander & Markewitz, Peter & Robinius, Martin & Stolten, Detlef, 2018. "Time series aggregation for energy system design: Modeling seasonal storage," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 123-135.
    11. Löffler, Konstantin & Burandt, Thorsten & Hainsch, Karlo & Oei, Pao-Yu & Seehaus, Frederik & Wejda, Felix, 2022. "Chances and barriers for Germany's low carbon transition - Quantifying uncertainties in key influential factors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PA).
    12. Welder, Lara & Ryberg, D.Severin & Kotzur, Leander & Grube, Thomas & Robinius, Martin & Stolten, Detlef, 2018. "Spatio-temporal optimization of a future energy system for power-to-hydrogen applications in Germany," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 1130-1149.
    13. Joseph Akpan & Oludolapo Olanrewaju, 2023. "Towards a Common Methodology and Modelling Tool for 100% Renewable Energy Analysis: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-42, September.
    14. Prina, Matteo Giacomo & Manzolini, Giampaolo & Moser, David & Nastasi, Benedetto & Sparber, Wolfram, 2020. "Classification and challenges of bottom-up energy system models - A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    15. Schreiner, Lena & Madlener, Reinhard, 2022. "Investing in power grid infrastructure as a flexibility option: A DSGE assessment for Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    16. 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).
    17. Nallapaneni Manoj Kumar & Aneesh A. Chand & Maria Malvoni & Kushal A. Prasad & Kabir A. Mamun & F.R. Islam & Shauhrat S. Chopra, 2020. "Distributed Energy Resources and the Application of AI, IoT, and Blockchain in Smart Grids," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-42, November.
    18. Maruf, Md. Nasimul Islam, 2021. "Open model-based analysis of a 100% renewable and sector-coupled energy system–The case of Germany in 2050," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).
    19. Thomas Pregger & Tobias Naegler & Wolfgang Weimer-Jehle & Sigrid Prehofer & Wolfgang Hauser, 2020. "Moving towards socio-technical scenarios of the German energy transition—lessons learned from integrated energy scenario building," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(4), pages 1743-1762, October.
    20. Hai Lu & Jiaquan Yang & Kari Alanne, 2018. "Energy Quality Management for a Micro Energy Network Integrated with Renewables in a Tourist Area: A Chinese Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-24, April.

    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:6:p:1003-:d:214041. 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.