An Enterprise Control Methodology for the Techno-Economic Assessment of the Energy Water Nexus Steffi O. Muhanji 1,1, , Amro M. Farid 1,2 Thayer School of Engineering, 14 Engineering Dr., Hanover, NH 03755 Abstract In recent years, the energy-water nexus literature has recognized that the electricity and water infrastructure that enable the production, distribution, and consumption of these two precious commodities is fundamentally intertwined. Electric power is used to produce, treat, distribute, and recycle water while water is used to generate and consume electricity. In the meantime, significant attention has been given to renewable energy integration within the context of global climate change. While these two issues may seem unrelated, their resolution is potentially synergistic in that renewable energy technologies not only present low CO 2 emissions but also low water-intensities. Furthermore, because water is readily stored, it has the potential to act as a flexible energy resource on both the supply as well as the demand-side of the electricity grid. Despite these synergies, the renewable energy integration and energy-water nexus literature have yet to methodologically converge to systematically address potential synergies. This paper advances an enterprise control methodology as a means of assessing the techno-economic performance of the energy water nexus. The enterprise control methodology has been developed in recent years to advance the methodological state of the art of renewable energy integration studies and used recently to carry out a full-scale study for the Independent System Operator (ISO) New England system. The methodology quantifies day-ahead and real-time energy market production costs, dispatched energy mixes, required operating reserves, levels of curtailment, and grid imbalances. This energy- water nexus methodological extension now includes flexible water-energy resources within the grid’s energy resource portfolio and quantifies the amounts of water withdrawn and consumed. The simulation methodology is demonstrated on a modified version of the RTS-96 (RTS-GMLC) test case. Keywords: , energy-water nexus, electricity market, smart power grid, smart water grid, water distribution, energy management Nomenclature Email addresses: [email protected](Steffi O. Muhanji), [email protected](Amro M. Farid) 1 Graduate Student at the Thayer School of Engineering at Dartmouth 2 Associate Professor at the Thayer School of Engineering at Dartmouth Preprint submitted to Applied Energy March 22, 2022 arXiv:1908.10469v1 [eess.SY] 27 Aug 2019
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
An Enterprise Control Methodology for the Techno-Economic Assessment of theEnergy Water Nexus
Steffi O. Muhanji1,1,, Amro M. Farid1,2
Thayer School of Engineering, 14 Engineering Dr., Hanover, NH 03755
Abstract
In recent years, the energy-water nexus literature has recognized that the electricity and water infrastructure that
enable the production, distribution, and consumption of these two precious commodities is fundamentally intertwined.
Electric power is used to produce, treat, distribute, and recycle water while water is used to generate and consume
electricity. In the meantime, significant attention has been given to renewable energy integration within the context
of global climate change. While these two issues may seem unrelated, their resolution is potentially synergistic in
that renewable energy technologies not only present low CO2 emissions but also low water-intensities. Furthermore,
because water is readily stored, it has the potential to act as a flexible energy resource on both the supply as well as the
demand-side of the electricity grid. Despite these synergies, the renewable energy integration and energy-water nexus
literature have yet to methodologically converge to systematically address potential synergies. This paper advances an
enterprise control methodology as a means of assessing the techno-economic performance of the energy water nexus.
The enterprise control methodology has been developed in recent years to advance the methodological state of the art
of renewable energy integration studies and used recently to carry out a full-scale study for the Independent System
Operator (ISO) New England system. The methodology quantifies day-ahead and real-time energy market production
costs, dispatched energy mixes, required operating reserves, levels of curtailment, and grid imbalances. This energy-
water nexus methodological extension now includes flexible water-energy resources within the grid’s energy resource
portfolio and quantifies the amounts of water withdrawn and consumed. The simulation methodology is demonstrated
on a modified version of the RTS-96 (RTS-GMLC) test case.
Keywords: , energy-water nexus, electricity market, smart power grid, smart water grid, water distribution, energy
management
Nomenclature
Email addresses: [email protected] (Steffi O. Muhanji), [email protected] (Amro M. Farid)1Graduate Student at the Thayer School of Engineering at Dartmouth2Associate Professor at the Thayer School of Engineering at Dartmouth
Preprint submitted to Applied Energy March 22, 2022
arX
iv:1
908.
1046
9v1
[ee
ss.S
Y]
27
Aug
201
9
Integer Variables
H ,W hydro index,wind index.
L,V load index,solar index.
An(k,s,x,l,L,W,V,H) bus incidence matrices.
k, n generator index, bus index.
l, t line index, time index.
m active demand response (DR) index.
NL,NW number of loads, and wind units.
NV,NH number of solar, and hydro units.
NG,ND number of generators, active DR.
NX ,NB number of penalty variables and buses.
x penalty variable index.
Binary Variables
uDmt start-up state of DR unit m at time t.
uGkt start-up state of generator k at time t.
vDmt shutdown state of DR unit m at time t.
vGkt shutdown state of generator k at time t.
wDmt ON/OFF state of DR unit m at time t.
wGkt ON/OFF state of generator k at time t.
wPst discharging state of storage s at time t.
wS st charging state of storage s at time t.
Real-Valued Parameters
γ % transmission losses.
CF Cost of fuel in $/MJ.
Es, Es energy capacity limits of storage unit s (MWh).
P+s , P
+s power limits of storage unit s (MW).
P−s , P−s pumping limits of storage unit s (MW).
Pk, Pk power limits of generator k (MW).
Pm, Pm power limits of DR unit m (MW).
Rk,Rk ramping limits of generator k (MW/min).
Rm,Rm ramping limits of DR unit m (MW/min).
RH ,RH ramping rates of hydro unitH (MW/min).
RV,RV ramping rates of solar unitV (MW/min).
RW,RW ramping limits of wind unitW (MW/min).
Bnl incidence matrix of branches to buses.
CL,CW curtailment costs ( $MWhr ) for load and wind.
CV,CH curtailment costs ( $MWhr ) for solar and hydro.
CDk shutdown costs ($) of generator k.
CDm shutdown costs ($) of DR unit m.
CFk fixed costs ( $hr ) of gen k.
CFm fixed costs ( $hr ) of DR unit m.
CLk linear costs ( $MWhr ) of gen k.
CLm linear cost ( $MWhr ) of DR unit m.
CQk quadratic costs ( $MW2hr ) of gen k.
CQm quadratic costs ( $MW2hr ) of DR unit m.
CQx quadratic cost ( $MW2hr ) of penalty factor x.
CUk startup costs ($) of generator k.
CUm startup costs ($) of DR unit m.
dH curtailable fraction for hydro.
dL curtailable fraction for load.
dW, dV curtailable fraction for wind, and solar.
Pres load-following reserve requirements (MW).
Rres ramping reserve requirements (MW/min).
Th SCUC scheduling time step (normally, 1h).
Tm SCED time step (normally, 5 − 10mins).
Real-Valued Variables
εs reservior level of storage s at t = 0.
PH t day-ahead hydro forecast at time t (MW).
PLt day-ahead load forecast at time t (MW).
PVt day-ahead solar forecast at time t (MW).
PWt day-ahead wind forecast at time t (MW).
PH real-time hydro forecast (MW).
PL real-time load forecast (MW).
PV real-time solar forecast (MW).
PW real-time wind forecast (MW).
Est reservoir level of storage s at t ≥ 1 (MWh).
Flt power-flow through branch l at time t.
P+st discharging level of storage s at time t (MW).
P−st charging level of storage s at time t (MW).
Pk current power for the SCED (MW).
2
Pkt power output of generator k at time t.
Pk SCED power output of generator k.
Pmt demand response level at time t (MW).
Pxt penalty variable at time t (MW).
wH t percentage of hydro to curtail at time t.
wLt percentage of load to curtail at time t.
wVt percentage of solar to curtail at time t.
wWt percentage of wind to curtail at time t.
1. Introduction
Water security is one of the main challenges facing mankind today. Due to the effects of climate change on
hydrology patterns, the amount of available freshwater resources is quickly declining[1, 2]. It is approximated that
only 200, 000km3–1% of all freshwater is available for human consumption and utilization[3]. This includes water
required for all day-to-day human needs as well as water needed for the agriculture, manufacturing, and electric
power sectors[3–5]. With the expected population growth and industrialization of developing countries, both the
energy and water demand per capita are expected to rise significantly[5]. As a result of these challenges, being able
to efficiently utilize available water resources and prevent over-exploitation is imperative[3, 4]. On the one hand,
these challenges call for better ways of managing available water resources whether it is in the improvement of water
treatment standards, flue gas management, or infrastructure upgrades. On the other hand, better management of
water-intensive industries such as the electric power sector would go a long way to minimize their strain on available
water resources. Flexible control of the electricity supply system[6] is particularly crucial within the context of
renewable energy integration studies given that renewables 1). are highly variable 2). have very low life-cycle water
consumption, and 3). require the grid to have flexible operating capability to be able to respond to variability of
supply. The study of the energy-water nexus must, therefore, converge with renewable energy integration studies.
In recent years, the energy-water nexus literature has recognized that the water and electricity production, distribu-
tion, and consumption systems are fundamentally intertwined[1, 3–5]. The electricity industry is inherently dependent
on the adequate supply of water to support generation whether its in cooling thermal power plants, hydroelectric power
generation, or in the extraction of raw fuels such as natural gas[1, 3–5]. Thermal power plants withdraw large quan-
tities of water for cooling purposes and depending on the type of cooling technology, a significant amount of this
water is lost through evaporation or blowdown[2, 4]. To illustrate, a recent study estimates that water withdrawals
by electricity generating facilities in 2010 constituted 45% of the overall freshwater withdrawals in the United States
with approximately 2% of that water being consumed as a result[4]. In addition to cooling purposes, large quantities
of water are utilized in the extraction of raw fuels for electricity generation[7, 8]. A recent study reported that the
water consumption (in liters per gigajoule – L/GJ) for worldwide production of carbon-based and nuclear fuels is as
follows: 1) traditional oil (3–7 L/GJ); 2) oil from oil sands (70–1800 L/GJ); 3) conventional natural gas (minimal
water use); 4) shale gas (36–54 L/GJ); 5) coal (5–70 L/GJ); and 6) uranium (4–22 L/GJ)[8]. Given that in 2015,
76.9% of the world’s total electricity was generated from oil, coal, natural gas and nuclear fuels while 16% came from
hydroelectricity[9], reducing the water intensity of these generation processes is crucial to ensuring water security.
3
Similarly, significant electric power is required to support water production and distribution needs such as desalina-
tion, waste-water treatment and recycling, and pumping[1, 3–5]. With this level of coupling, significant synergies
could be realized by studying the two systems holistically.
In the meantime, significant attention has been given to the integration of renewable energy resources into the
electricity grid as a means of decarbonizing the electricity supply system. Due to concerns about climate change, solar
and wind installations are steadily increasing while coal, nuclear and oil power plants are slowly being retired[10].
Recent studies have shown that variable energy resources (VERs) such as solar and wind possess dynamics that span
multiple time scales and hence, affect different layers of power system’s control[11–13]. These findings illustrate
that the traditional power system’s hierarchical control structure is no longer sufficient to ensure the reliability of the
system especially as the penetration of VERs continues to grow[14]. Additionally, these studies have also confirmed
that due to a high penetration of VERs, operators are forced to rely on manual curtailment of such resources to balance
the net load[15]. In addition, forecast errors of VERs have been shown to increase infeasible dispatches in the real-
time market[16, 17]. Another key conclusion of these integration studies is that the intermittency and uncertainty
of VERs is likely to increase the reserve requirements and hence the marginal production cost of electricity[18–21].
These factors pose many challenges to grid operators both at the distribution and transmission level.
While the challenges of renewable generation and energy-water-nexus may seem unrelated, their resolution is
potentially synergistic. Renewable energy technologies not only present low CO2 emissions, but they also have low
water-intensities. Furthermore, since water is easily stored, it has the potential to act as a flexible energy resource on
both the supply-side as well as the demand-side of the electricity grid[22]. As a consequence of decarbonization and
low gas prices, a lot of new natural gas power plants are being installed to replace the retired coal and oil generation
facilities[23]. However, natural gas production withdraws and consumes significant amounts of water (≈ 1000m3–
30000m3 per shale well per year [7]) and hence, cannot be ignored within the context of renewable energy integration
[7, 24–29]. To meet the required CO2 emission reductions, natural gas production is projected to grow by 44%
between 2011 and 2040 [30]. In order to maintain the reliability of the electricity grid with high penetrations of
wind and solar, system operators need to flexibly operate generation resources so as to meet the intermittency and
uncertainty of solar and wind generation[14]. Additionally, they must have the ability to flexibly control available
water-dependent electricity resources and electricity-intensive water processes both to minimize costs and improve
the reliability of supply[14]. In this case, water system operators can potentially increase their profits by providing
demand-response and ancillary services.
1.1. Literature Gap
Despite the clear synergistic advantages, the renewable energy integration and EWN literature have not yet con-
verged methodologically to systematically address potential synergies. Renewable energy integration studies have
focused solely on the operation of electricity markets with large penetrations of VERs[21, 31–34]. A variety of these
studies have been case specific and only considered a single unit-commitment/economic dispatch layers of power
4
system control[35–37]. Others have taken statistical approaches to determining the forecast errors of wind and so-
lar. A majority of these studies have focused on the acquisition of normal operating reserves such as load-following,
regulation, and ramping reserves[21, 31–34]. However, a recent review of integration studies shows major method-
ological limitations in these studies[14]. First, the quantity of the required reserves is based on the experiences of
grid operators which no longer applies to systems with high penetrations of VERs[38, 39]. Second, although both the
net load variability and forecast error contribute towards normal operating reserves, most studies consider only one of
the variables[38, 40]. Lastly, most studies fail to consider the effects of timescales on the various types of operating
reserve quantities. This same review [14] proposed a holistic approach based on enterprise control to study the full
impact of VERs on power system balancing operation and reserve requirements. Enterprise control is an integrated
and holistic approach that allows operators to improve the technical performance of the grid while realizing cost
savings[14]. This approach allows for a multi-timescale analysis of system dynamics and thus, ensures the accurate
determination of operating reserves. An application of enterprise control in the form of the Electric Power Enterprise
Control System (EPECS) simulator has been proposed in literature and tested on various case studies including the
ISO New England system[34].
In the meantime, the energy-water-nexus literature has come up with individual technologies, policy recommenda-
tions and system analysis techniques to study both the electricity and water supply systems. Policy-based studies tend
to take a qualitative and sometimes statistical approach while focusing on a specific geographical region[3, 8, 24, 41–
52]. Similarly, system analysis techniques have been case-study driven, geography-specific, rather than generic
methodologies that are generally applicable. Some works have studied the water impact of natural gas production,
the water-intensity of thermal power plants[1, 2, 53–56], and the optimization of water pumps[57–62]. An interesting
group of these system analysis techniques are those that co-optimize energy and water resources[63–72]. However,
the problem with these approaches is that they are single layer optimizations[66–68]. For example, [66] studied only
optimal network flow, [67] the economic dispatch, and [68] the unit commitment problem for a combined water,
power, and co-production facilities. Other approaches studied the demand response capabilities of water distribution
systems while exploiting key water distribution features such as variable speed pumps to maximize returns and reduce
consumption[69–72]. Due to a lack of generic techniques, most of these studies are neither generally extensible nor
applicable to other case-study geographies.
1.2. Original Contribution
This paper extends the enterprise control approach presented and implemented in [14, 73–78] so as to assess
the techno-economic performance of the energy-water nexus. In recent years, the EPECS methodology has been
developed to advance the methodological state of the art of renewable energy integration studies and has been used to
carry out a full-scale study in ISO New England[34, 78]. The methodology quantifies the dispatched energy mixes,
the required operating reserves, levels of curtailment, grid imbalances, and the day-ahead and real-time production
costs[34, 78]. The energy-water-nexus methodological extension presented in this paper includes flexible water-
5
energy resources within the grid’s energy resource portfolio and quantifies the water consumption and withdrawals.
For completeness, the methodology presented in this paper is both case and geography independent. The simulation
methodology is demonstrated on a modified version of the RTS-96 test case.
Figure 1: This figure shows all the physical flows between the energy water-nexus and the natural surface environment [Adapted from [64]].
1.3. Research Scope
This work adopts as its research scope the yellow system boundary shown in Fig. 1. The traditional electric power
system literature does not take into account non-electrical variables at the system boundary. For example, in power
flow analysis, generators are modeled as sources and loads as sinks irrespective of the non-electrical energy flows
that they cause upstream or downstream. In contrast, the system boundary indicated in Fig. 1 explicitly includes
all matter and energy flows that enter the electric grid infrastructure. The energy-water nexus literature, in contrast,
often suffers from inconsistencies in the choice of system boundary. Many of these inconsistencies are caused by the
heterogeneity of energy-water resources (or lack thereof) in a methodology tailored to a specific case study geography.
Such studies often fail to recognize that the case study results limit the applicability to other regions and often require
that new analytical methodologies be developed as well. Consequently, this study employs a generic methodology
that is both case and geography independent to study the flows in and out of the system boundary especially with a
high penetration of VERs. This paper considers the effects of flexible water resources on ensuring the reliability of the
6
electricity grid and on the overall cost of supplying electricity to consumers. The study presents the value of flexible
water resources based on how they affect the amount of operating reserves, the total imbalances in the systems, and
the electricity market production costs. In so doing, this work seeks to assess the value of interactions between the
electric power system and the natural and built potable water systems.
1.4. Paper Outline
To that end, the rest of this paper is structured as follows: Section 2 presents the methodological approach for this
study. The security-constrained unit commitment (SCUC) and economic dispatch (SCED) formulations are presented
in Sections 2.2 and 2.3 respectively. The regulation model and the power flow analysis are discussed in Sections 2.4
and 2.5. A model for studying the water-energy flows is presented in Section 2.5. Section 3 describes the RTS-GMLC
test case and its application to this study. Section 4 presents the results for the case study focusing on operating
reserves, balancing performance, fuel consumption and CO2 emissions, water withdrawals and consumption, and the
cost implications. Finally, the paper is concluded in Section 5.
2. Methodology
Unit Commitment
Day-AheadResource Scheduling
RegulationService
Cyber Layer of Controls
Real-Time Balancing
Physical Power Grid Layer
PST (t)
PDA(t)∆PST (t)
PREG
∆PST (t)
PLOAD
RRAMP
P LOADREQ
RRAMPREQ
P (t)
P REGREQ
∆PRT (t)Regulation LevelImbalanceMeasurement
ImbalanceMeasurement
I (t)
P (t) - Actual net load;
PDA(t)
PST (t)
P LOADREQ
RRAMPREQ
P REGREQ
PLOAD
RRAMP
PREG
∆PDA(t)
∆PST (t)
∆PRT (t)
- Net load day-ahead forecast;
- Net load short-term forecast;
- Load following reserve requirement;
- Ramping reserve requirement;
- Regulation reserve requirement;
- Actually scheduled load following reserves;
- Actually scheduled ramping reserves;
- Actually scheduled regulation reserves;
- Imbalances at the day-ahead scheduling output;
- Imbalances at the real-time balancing output;
- Imbalances at the regulation service output;
- Residual imbalance at the system output;
I (t)
Reserve Scheduling
Storage Commitment Regulation
Economic Dispatch
Storage Dispatch
Figure 2: The EPECS methodology is used to study the real-time flows for the electricity supply system.
2.1. Overview
This paper employs the enterprise control methodology introduced in [75–78] as a holistic approach for the techno-
economic assessment of newly integrated variable energy resources. The EPECS simulator is a modular simulator that
comprises of three control and decision-making layers on top of a physical power grid layer as illustrated in Figure 2.
The decision-making and control layers include a resource scheduling layer in the form of a security-constrained unit
commitment (SCUC), a balancing layer accomplished through the security constrained economic dispatch (SCED),
7
and a regulation layer. These three layers work together to holistically quantify and address imbalances occurring
throughout the electric power system. The enterprise control methodology has been assessed and validated through a
set of numerical simulations on various well-known test cases such as the IEEE 11-bus test case, and the IEEE RTS-96
test case[76]. Most recently, the enterprise control simulator was used to study the impact of various penetrations of
wind and solar on the ISO-New England system[79, 80]. This section presents the enterprise control methodology
and extends its application to the techno-economic assessment of the energy-water nexus. The rest of this section
is structured as follows: Section 2.2 defines the SCUC formulation, Section 2.3 presents the SCED formulation,
Section 2.4 describes the regulation model and finally Section 2.5 presents the mathematics for quantifying the energy-
matter flows across the yellow system boundary of Figure 1.
2.2. Security-Constrained Unit Commitment (SCUC)
The SCUC commits a set of generators and demand response resources so as to meet the stochastic net load at
a minimum cost. It also dispatches storage units, schedules reserves and is executed a day in advance. The SCUC
formulation presented below is adapted from [34] in order to accommodate energy and water resources.