Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
158 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Long-term Hydrothermal Bid-based Market Simulator (2403.07270v2)

Published 12 Mar 2024 in math.OC, cs.SY, and eess.SY

Abstract: Simulating long-term hydrothermal bid-based markets considering strategic agents is a challenging task. The representation of strategic agents considering intertemporal constraints within a stochastic framework brings additional complexity to the already difficult single-period bilevel, thus, non-convex, optimal bidding problem. Thus, we propose a simulation methodology that effectively addresses these challenges for large-scale hydrothermal power systems. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the framework through a case study with real data from the large-scale Brazilian power system. In the case studies, we show the effects of market concentration in power systems and how contracts can be used to mitigate them. In particular, we show how market power might affect the current setting in Brazil. The developed method can strongly benefit policymakers, market monitors, and market designers as simulations can be used to understand existing power systems and experiment with alternative designs.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (44)
  1. IEA, “Hydropower,” https://www.iea.org/reports/hydropower, June 2022.
  2. M. V. F. Pereira and L. M. V. G. Pinto, “Multi-stage stochastic optimization applied to energy planning,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 52, no. 1-3, pp. 359–375, 1991.
  3. “Conversations on designs – wholesale electricity markets,” IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, vol. 17, pp. 1–108, January 2019.
  4. L. Ribeiro, A. Street, D. Valladão, A. C. Freire, and L. Barroso, “Technical and economical aspects of wholesale electricity markets: An international comparison and main contributions for improvements in brazil,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 220, p. 109364, 2023.
  5. A. Gjelsvik, M. M. Belsnes, and A. Haugstad, “An algorithm for stochastic medium-term hydrothermal scheduling under spot price uncertainty,” in Proceedings of 13th Power Systems Computation Conference, 1999.
  6. N. Löhndorf and A. Shapiro, “Modeling time-dependent randomness in stochastic dual dynamic programming,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 273, no. 2, pp. 650–661, 2019.
  7. G. Steeger, L. A. Barroso, and S. Rebennack, “Optimal bidding strategies for hydro-electric producers: A literature survey,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 1758–1766, 2014.
  8. G. Gross and D. Finlay, “Generation supply bidding in perfectly competitive electricity markets,” Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 83–98, 2000.
  9. D. Pozo, E. Sauma, and J. Contreras, “Basic theoretical foundations and insights on bilevel models and their applications to power systems,” Annals of Operations Research, vol. 254, no. 1-2, pp. 303–334, 2017.
  10. B. Flach, L. Barroso, and M. Pereira, “Long-term optimal allocation of hydro generation for a price-maker company in a competitive market: latest developments and a stochastic dual dynamic programming approach,” IET generation, transmission & distribution, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 299–314, 2010.
  11. G. Steeger and S. Rebennack, “Dynamic convexification within nested Benders decomposition using Lagrangian relaxation: An application to the strategic bidding problem,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 257, no. 2, pp. 669–686, 2017.
  12. M. Habibian, A. Downward, and G. Zakeri, “Multistage stochastic demand-side management for price-making major consumers of electricity in a co-optimized energy and reserve market,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 280, no. 2, pp. 671–688, 2020.
  13. J. I. Pérez-Díaz, I. Guisández, M. Chazarra, and A. Helseth, “Medium-term scheduling of a hydropower plant participating as a price-maker in the automatic frequency restoration reserve market,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 185, p. 106399, 2020.
  14. J. Arteaga and H. Zareipour, “A Price-Maker/Price-Taker Model for the Operation of Battery Storage Systems in Electricity Markets,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 6912–6920, 2019.
  15. L. A. Barroso, R. D. Carneiro, S. Granville, M. V. Pereira, and M. Fampa, “Nash equilibrium in strategic bidding: a binary expansion approach,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 21, no. 2, p. 629, 2006.
  16. B. Fanzeres, A. Street, and D. Pozo, “A column-and-constraint generation algorithm to find nash equilibrium in pool-based electricity markets,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 189, p. 106806, 2020.
  17. T. J. Scott and E. G. Read, “Modelling hydro reservoir operation in a deregulated electricity market,” International Transactions in Operational Research, vol. 3, no. 3-4, pp. 243–253, 1996.
  18. R. Kelman, L. A. N. Barroso, and M. V. F. Pereira, “Market power assessment and mitigation in hydrothermal systems,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 354–359, 2001.
  19. J. Villar and H. Rudnick, “Hydrothermal market simulator using game theory: assessment of market power,” Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 91–98, 2003.
  20. J. P. Molina, J. M. Zolezzi, J. Contreras, H. Rudnick, and M. J. Reveco, “Nash-cournot equilibria in hydrothermal electricity markets,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 1089–1101, 2010.
  21. H. Höschle, H. Le Cadre, Y. Smeers, A. Papavasiliou, and R. Belmans, “An admm-based method for computing risk-averse equilibrium in capacity markets,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 4819–4830, 2018.
  22. G. Steeger and S. Rebennack, “Strategic bidding for multiple price-maker hydroelectric producers,” IIE Transactions, vol. 47, no. 9, pp. 1013–1031, 2015.
  23. M. Löschenbrand, W. Wei, and F. Liu, “Hydro-thermal power market equilibrium with price-making hydropower producers,” Energy, vol. 164, pp. 377–389, 2018.
  24. X. Wu, C. Cheng, S. Miao, G. Li, and S. Li, “Long-Term Market Competition Analysis for Hydropower Stations using SSDP-Games,” Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, vol. 146, no. 6, p. 04020037, 2020.
  25. J. Bushnell, “A Mixed Complementarity Model of Hydrothermal Electricity Competition in the Western United States,” Operations Research, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 80–93, 2003. 7 stages cal+PAC but no limit.
  26. K. C. Almeida and A. J. Conejo, “Medium-Term Power Dispatch in Predominantly Hydro Systems: An Equilibrium Approach,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 2384–2394, 2013.
  27. M. Cruz, E. Finardi, V. d. Matos, and J. Luna, “Strategic bidding for price-maker producers in predominantly hydroelectric systems,” Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 140, pp. 435–444, 2016.
  28. Y. Liang, Q. Lin, S. He, Q. Liu, Z. Chen, and X. Liu, “Power Market Equilibrium Analysis with Large-scale Hydropower System Under Uncertainty,” 2020 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe (ISGT-Europe), vol. 00, pp. 329–333, 2020.
  29. E. Moiseeva and M. R. Hesamzadeh, “Bayesian and Robust Nash Equilibria in Hydrodominated Systems Under Uncertainty,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 818–830, 2018.
  30. G. Infanger and D. P. Morton, “Cut sharing for multistage stochastic linear programs with interstage dependency,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 75, no. 2, pp. 241–256, 1996.
  31. A. Shapiro, “Analysis of stochastic dual dynamic programming method,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 209, no. 1, pp. 63–72, 2011.
  32. A. Shapiro, W. Tekaya, J. P. da Costa, and M. P. Soares, “Risk neutral and risk averse stochastic dual dynamic programming method,” European journal of operational research, vol. 224, no. 2, pp. 375–391, 2013.
  33. B. Rudloff, A. Street, and D. M. Valladão, “Time consistency and risk averse dynamic decision models: Definition, interpretation and practical consequences,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 234, no. 3, pp. 743–750, 2014.
  34. A. W. Rosemberg, A. Street, J. D. Garcia, D. M. Valladão, T. Silva, and O. Dowson, “Assessing the cost of network simplifications in long-term hydrothermal dispatch planning models,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 196–206, 2021.
  35. S. Debia, P.-O. Pineau, and A. S. Siddiqui, “Strategic storage use in a hydro-thermal power system with carbon constraints,” Energy Economics, vol. 98, p. 105261, 2021.
  36. G. L. M. Fredo, E. C. Finardi, and V. L. de Matos, “Assessing solution quality and computational performance in the long-term generation scheduling problem considering different hydro production function approaches,” Renewable energy, vol. 131, pp. 45–54, 2019.
  37. P. Lino, L. A. N. Barroso, M. V. Pereira, R. Kelman, and M. H. Fampa, “Bid-based dispatch of hydrothermal systems in competitive markets,” Annals of Operations Research, vol. 120, no. 1-4, pp. 81–97, 2003.
  38. L. Barroso, S. Granville, P. Jackson, M. Pereira, and E. Read, “Overview of virtual models for reservoir management in competitive markets,” in Proceedings 4th IEEE/Cigré International Workshop on Hydro Scheduling in Competitive Markets, Bergen, Norway, 2012.
  39. J. Zou, S. Ahmed, and X. A. Sun, “Stochastic dual dynamic integer programming,” Mathematical Programming, vol. 175, no. 1-2, pp. 461–502, 2019.
  40. J. A. Dias, G. Machado, A. Soares, and J. D. Garcia, “Modeling multiscale variable renewable energy and inflow scenarios in very large regions with nonparametric bayesian networks,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.04855, 2020.
  41. T. Silva, D. Valladão, and T. Homem-de Mello, “A data-driven approach for a class of stochastic dynamic optimization problems,” Computational Optimization and Applications, vol. 80, pp. 687–729, 2021.
  42. J. Bezanson, A. Edelman, S. Karpinski, and V. B. Shah, “Julia: A fresh approach to numerical computing,” SIAM review, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 65–98, 2017.
  43. M. Lubin, O. Dowson, J. Dias Garcia, J. Huchette, B. Legat, and J. P. Vielma, “JuMP 1.0: Recent improvements to a modeling language for mathematical optimization,” Mathematical Programming Computation, vol. 15, p. 581–589, 2023.
  44. FICO, “FICO Xpress Optimizer Reference Manual,” 2023.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now