Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This project has received funding from the European
Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation
programme under grant agreement n° 691777
FutureFlow cross-border pilot test results
Andreja I. Kanduč, MSc
EIMV,15.10.2019
Participating countries
Project in general
Survey of existing state
TheoreticalTarget Model
Simulations Pilot testsAnalyses, conclusions
cross-border balancing aFRR energy exchange
and coordinated cross-border redispatching
Test scenarious
Data applied: Based on TSOs data (realised responses of aFRR control, bids, ATC, models) from period 6–31 March 2017.
• Table 2 – Simulation Cases and its comparisons
•
Comparison of FF Integration Cases
• Benefits from introducing the regional cooperation under
the selected target model are rather high, with potential
cost reduction of more than 60%
• It incorporates joint benefits of both imbalance netting
and cross-border CMOL activation
Balancing: economic analyses
BSP nBSP 2
Regional Balancing Platform with Common Activation Function for cross-border exchange of aFRR
TSO 1 TSO 2 TSO 3 TSO n
BSP 1
BSP nBSP 2
BSP 1
BSP nBSP 2
BSP 1
BSP nBSP 2
BSP 1
Co
ntr
ol &
M
easu
rem
ent
Bid
din
g
aFR
R R
T d
ata
Bid
din
g
CZC
aFR
R R
T d
ata
Bid
din
g
CZC
aFR
R R
T d
ata
Bid
din
g
CZC
aFR
R R
T d
ata
Bid
din
g
CZC
Co
ntr
ol &
M
easu
rem
ent
Bid
din
g
Co
ntr
ol &
M
easu
rem
ent
Bid
din
g
Co
ntr
ol &
M
easu
rem
ent
Bid
din
g
DR DG BG DR DG BG DR DG BG DR DG BG
FutureFlow architecture
Pilot test
Use cases specifications for pilot testing:
• UC1: Testing of communications and IT systems and main building blocks.
• UC2: DR/DG participation in aFRR.
• UC3: Cross border DR/DG participation in aFRR.
• UC4: DR/DG connection with two BSPs.
Pilot test1. IT KPIs
1. Delay: latency experienced by data packet on point-to-point communication path
2. Packet loss: absolute number of lost data pockets in a unit of time
3. Transferred amount of data: the absolute amount of data in a given period
2. Technical KPIs
1. ACE quality
2. Full activation time (FAT)
3. Size of overshoot
4. LF controller settings
5. Size of imbalance netting effect
6. ATC and FB transmission capacity limits
7. Quality of DR&DG response
8. Volatility of activations of BSPs, and
9. Suspicious situations
Results for KPI communication
• Ping duration – how long the endpoint has pinged another endpoint
• Ping frequency – the number of packets/s sent from one endpoint to another.
• Round trip time (given from ping command):
• Minimum;
• Average;
• Maximum;
Parameter Result
Ping duration 7200 s
Ping frequency 1 packet / s
RTT min 15.2 ms
RTT average 26.9 ms
RTT max 1171.6 ms
Table 9.1: Delay of packets results . Testing towards FutureFlow Cloud platform (MQTT communication channel).
Compliant performance of VPP
.
DR/DG type Negative capacity share Positive capacity share
Industrial prrocess 93.03 % 100 %
CHP 6.97 % 0 %
Capacity reserves 6.97 % 0 %
Compliant performance of VPP : Including solar plants
DR/DG type Negative capacity
share
Positive capacity
share
Hydro 0 % 100 %
Solar 100 % 0 %
Capacity reserves 0 % 0 %
Balancing & Economic KPI
• comparison of performance through balancing KPIs
Table 9.13: Pilot tests: comparison of performance through balancing KPIs
Flexible capacity potential participating in pilot tests
ELES
(MW)
APG
(MW)
MAVIR
(MW)
Transelectrica
(MW)
Total
(MW)
Target 15 15 5 5 40
Contracted 42,0 24,7 3,5 3,1 73,3
GA obligation: „pool of 30 to 45 MW of C&I DR&DG units“
A vision of possible DR/DG contributions to aFRR by the TSOs.
Barriers
• Most of DR/DG can not participate on their own. Aggregators have a significant role.
• Technical barriers
• Regulatory barriers
• Fair treatment
• Price transparency
Technical demands:
• Faster market (GCT)
• Larger market (cross border)
• Smaller products
• Efficient pricing
Thank you