2005 IEEE/PES Transmission and Distribution

Conference & Exhibition: Asia and Pacific

Dalian, China

Transmission Expansion in the Deregulated

Power System Considering Social
Welfare and Reliability Criteria
Pathom Attaviriyanupap, Member, IEEE, and Akihiko Yokoyama, Member, IEEE

Abstract-- In the present paper, the authors propose a new electric power. It is desirable that the transmission system
method to determine an optimal transmission expansion plan in would bring about the competitive bidders from far away to
the deregulated power system. In the proposed scheme, social load point and eliminate market where dominant generator can
welfare and reliability are taken into account. Social welfare is exercise market power due to the transmission capacity
computed from the summation of welfare of all market
participants. On the other hand, reliability is determined from constraint. The objective for transmission expansion in the
the cost of the loss of load or outage cost of consumers. deregulated environment should be different from that in the
Uncertainties such as generation, load, participant bidding traditional power industry. Therefore, new approaches and
strategies and facility availability are included in the planning criteria are needed. Transmission expansion planning must
problem. Uncertainties of generation and load are handled by take into account various uncertainties such as generation
using the analytical method while uncertainty of bidding strategy investment, load growth and availability of generation and
and facility availability are handled by using Monte Carlo
simulation. In the proposed method, two transmission expansion transmission facilities. Besides, market strategy of participant
cases: enhancing the existing transmission line capacity and should be considered.
investing in the new transmission line are investigated. In both In this paper, the authors propose a method to determine
cases, a set of transmission expansion plan candidates are picked optimal transmission expansion plan under the deregulated
up based on the social welfare sensitivity and price difference power system. The proposed scheme takes into account social
between buses. The most appropriate plan is selected based on welfare and reliability as objective function of the expansion
three decision making approaches: average value, risk-based and
probabilistic criterion. Numerical simulation is carried out for planning. Various uncertainties in power market such as
the modified IEEJ West 10-machine system. generation, load, bidding strategy and facility availability are
handled by using the combined probabilistic methods between
Index Terms-Decision Making, Deregulation, Monte Carlo the analytical method and Monte Carlo simulation. The
Simulation, Power System, Reliability, Transmission Expansion analytical method is employed to handle the uncertainties in
Planning, Uncertainty. generation and load in the future. On the other hand, Monte
Carlo simulation is applied to handle the uncertainties in
I. INTRODUCTION bidding strategy and facility availability. Two expansion
THE deregulation or reforming of electric power industry cases: enhancement of the existing line capacity and
has created a competitive open market environment. investment of new line are investigated. In both cases, a set of
Deregulation results in disaggregating into the basic parts of transmission expansion plan candidates are picked up based
generation, transmission and distribution. Responsibility of on two criteria: social welfare sensitivity and nodal price
these operations is put on generation companies (GENCOs), difference between each two buses. The optimal plan is
transmission companies (TRANSCOs) and distribution selected based on there decision making methods: average
companies (DISCOs) with a central coordinator, called an value, risk-based and probabilistic-based criterion. In order to
independent system operator (ISO), whose role is to balance shown the performance of the proposed method, numerical
supply and demand in real time and to maintain system simulation is conducted for the modified IEEJ West 10-
reliability and security [1]. Although the deregulation has machine system [2].
resulted in many variations in the power industry, it is agreed
that transmission system should be controlled by independent II. PROBLEM FORMULATION
organization because it affects in all participants. In the new In the past, the purpose of transmission expansion planning
environment, the transmission system plays a critical role in is to determine where and how many new circuits should be
providing access to all participants to deliver or consume the installed at the minimum investment cost, subject to
operational constraints, to meet the system requirements for a
The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Graduate single future demand (peak load), and the generation
School of Engineering, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. (emails: pathomg configuration expected in some future year. The mathematical
syl.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp, yokoyama(syl.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp).

0-7803-9114-4/05/$20.00 ©2005 IEEE. 1

 2

formulation of this problem can be found in [3]. DISCO t DISCO Engy-E

However, solving the transmission expansion planning by

using the traditional model has some drawbacks as follows: Other chirge f > .ge Fe-gy -os

1. The problem is considered deterministically, which is Spot market and Transmission network/
not appropriate. Market mechanism and uncertainty in the /t (Integrated TRANSCO and I SO) t

deregulated environment should be taken into account and the

probabilistic or risk-based approach should be applied.
Ote,
Other chrge Eergy -os

2. Considering reliability criterion only under the normal ne

gy-cot <h,g Energy cost
condition is not enough. Inclusion of facility availabilities will
make the problem more realistic. Fig. 1. Integrated market model of ISO and TRANSOs
3. Because many participants are affected by the
transmission expansion, the objective of this problem must be We use the social welfare in (7) as objective function for
modified. The expansion that provides the best advantage (so- the transmission expansion planning problem. Obviously, the
called social welfare) for all participants should be selected. reliability is taken into account by the outage cost of DISCO.
To overcome the above drawbacks, a new formulation is The mathematical formulation of the planning problem in
presented here. In this paper, we assume that ISO and the new environment can be expressed as in (8)-(12).
TRANSCOs are integrated into one organization, who acts as M N
a market and transmission system operator at the same time. max SW = Z (CU, - CICjc)- GBCi - INV (8)
The market model is shown in Fig. 1. We will call this j=l i=l
integrated organization Transmission System Operator (TSO). subject to
Under this model, TSO is a single buyer who purchases N M
energy from GENCOs and sell it to DISCOs. Assume that 4gi = lj (9)
there is no direct contract between GENCO and DISCO. All i=l j=l
transactions must be cleared in the spot market. The social gimin < gi < gimax i =,...N (10)
welfare is calculated from the summation of participant
j ,
<<Imin j = ,..........Max
1
welfares subtract the expansion cost as shown in (1).
N M LFq < LFqmax , q 1, ...,Q (12)
SW = E GW, +Z CWj + TOW-INV (1) where g, and Ij are the schedule outputs of i-th GENCO andj-
i=1 j= th DISCO in the spot market. gimin, gimax, 'jmin, 'jmax are the
where lower and upper limits of i-th GENCO and j-th DISCO,
GWI = GRVI - GBCi - GTUCi (2) respectively. LFq is the line flow in q-th transmission line,
CWj = CUj - CTCj - CICj - CTUCj (3) LFqmax is the capacity of q-th transmission line, Q is the
number of transmission lines.
TOW = TORV - TOTC (4) However, when there is unavailability of generation and/or
M N
Z transmission facility, the redispatch process will be conducted
TOR V CTCj + CTUCj + Z GTUCi (5) to maintain system security. The redispatch process is the
j=1i=1 optimization problem which determines the amount of power
N
of generator to be changed and the amount of load to be
TOTC = GRV, (6) curtailed. Detail of redispatch can be found in Appendix.
In the redispatch process, constraint (9) must be modified
Here SW is the social welfare, GW1, CWj and TOW are the to (13). Moreover, the additional constraints in (14) and (15)
welfares of i-th GENCO, j-th DISCO and TSO, respectively. must be included.
INV is the transmission expansion cost, N and M are the N M
numbers of GENCOs and DISCOs. GRVy, GBC, and GTUC, (13)
are the revenue, bid (supply function) and transmission usage L.(gi
i=l
+ Agi) = L
j=l
(Ij EENSj)-

charge of i-th GENCO. CUj, CTCj,CTUCj and CTUCj are the (14)
bid (demand function), cost of energy, outage cost and -9i <' Agi <' gi max - gi , i = 1,...N
transmission usage charge of j-th DISCO. TORV and TOTC 0 <EENSj < Ij, j =l,...M (15)
are the revenue and cost of TSO, respectively. Here gi and Ij are the original schedule outputs of i-th
After substituting (2)-(6) for (1), social welfare can be GENCO and j-th DISCO, Ag, and EENSj are the amount of
rewritten as: power of i-th GENCO to be changed and expected energy not
M N supplied of load ofj-th DISCO due to facility unavailability.
SW = (CUj - CICj )-ZGBCi - INV (7) If there is only inelastic demand, DISCO demand function
j=1 i=1 can be neglected. Hence, the objective function is changed to
It should be noted that social welfare in case where M N
TRANSCO and TSO have been separated can be derived by min TC =CJC1 +ZGBCi +INV (16)
using the similar way. It also provides the same result. j=4 i=

2
 3

In this paper, every DISCO has been treated equally. CIC Price ($/MWh)

of each DISCO is calculated from (17).

CICj = V * EENSj (17) m2/

where ;7 is the coefficient associated with load curtailment. In

ml
other words, C refers to the value of lost load (VLL) or the
outage cost. The unit of i7 is in $/MWh
.
It should be noted that the formulation is represented on 80% 100% MWh
hour-based. This is because hour-based is the most basic
phase and it can be extended to cover a long-term Fig. 2. Bidding strategy of GENCO in the spot market
transmission expansion planning without difficulty.

III. METHODOLOGY Price ($/MWh)

A. Assumption price cap

In this paper, we have some assumptions as follows:

1. Only one transmission expansion project is considered. DhLTP I-.-.--.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-----
1

2. The transmission expansion cost (INV) varies

DLP
proportionally to the capacity and length of the transmission Inelastic Elastic
line. load load

3. The DC power flow method is employed and the spot 100% MWh

market is cleared by using the nodal price mechanism.

Fig. 3. Bidding Strategy of DISCO in the spot market
B. Uncertainty
The uncertainties which are considered are as follows: Availability of generation and transmission is handled by
1. Uncertainty in generation-load pattern using Monte Carlo simulation. These availabilities are
2. Uncertainty in bidding strategy of market participant randomly generated based on their availability data.
3. Availability of generation and transmission facilities
C. Optimal Transmission Plan Determination
Generation investment and load growth can be predicted
based on many factors such as geography, resource and A combined approach between analytical method and
government policy. Because usually, there are not so much Monte Carlo simulation is proposed to solve transmission
possible generation-load patterns (capacity and position), this expansion planning problem. The calculation procedure can
uncertainty is handled by a set of generation-load patterns be described step by step as follows:
with their probabilities. 1. Start from the first generation-load pattern p = 1
The bidding strategy of participant in the spot market is 2. Obtain generation, load and transmission line data
modeled based on the real behavior in New England [4]. 3. Set Monte Carlo simulation scenario k= 1
According to the historical data, GENCO bid can be divided 4. The bidding strategies of GENCO and DISCO are
randomly generated.
into two parts. In the first part, GENCO bids based on the real
marginal cost of his/her units. Usually, this strategy is applied 5. Spot market is cleared, and the nodal price (NPpk),
from 0 MW to about 80% of capacity. In the second part, scheduled output of generation (gipk) and load (4jpk) are
GENCO bids extremely high for the rest of capacity. Bidding determined.
strategy can be showed as in Fig. 2. Slopes ml and m2 present 6. Generation and transmission facilities' availabilities are
the strategy of the first and second parts, respectively. The randomly generated.
uncertainty in GENCO bidding strategy is handled by using 7. If some of generation and/or transmission facilities are
Monte Carlo simulation. For each scenario, ml and m2 are unavailable, the redispatch process is applied in order to
generated randomly using Weibul and Normal distributions as determine the amount of power of generator to be changed (A
shown in (18) and (19), respectively. gipk) and the amount of load to be curtailed (EENSjpk).
8. Compute SWpk using equation (8)
f((m)= a )C exp) r m. p;y,a > 0 (18) 9. Repeat from step 3 to step 8 until the predefined
number of scenarios (K) is reached. Then, compute SWp and
from the average value of SWpk and NPpkof all scenarios.
f(m) = (1-(M_)2l 2 (19) NPp10. Repeat step 1 until the number of generation-load
Uncertainty of DISCO bid is also handled by using Monte patterns (P) is reached. Social welfare and nodal price before
Carlo simulation. The strategy of DISCO is represented by the expansion (SWo and NPo) are computed by using (20) and (21).
parameters: high price (DHP) and low price (DLP) as shown
in Fig. 3. These parameters are generated using Normal SWo = E (SWp * probp) (20)
distribution. p=l

3
 4
(1) <1,2> <3,4, < 7,8 < 11,12> < 15,16> <19,20> <23,24, <29,30, (9

NPO E (NPP * probp) (21)

LI -8T L9
p=l (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
50k L2 L3 L4 L5 TL6 L7
where probp is the probability ofp-th generation-load pattern. <s,6> L10b <9,1o' LIi 13,14' L12 <17,18' L13 <21,22' L14 <25,26 <27,28,
L
L16 <31,32' L17
11. Determine the set of transmission expansion plan
candidates. In case of enhancing the existing transmission line
capacity, the candidate is determined from the sensitivity of
SW to enhancement capacity (change in SW when 1 MW Fig. 4. Modified IEEJ West 10-machine system
capacity is added to the existing transmission line). We
assume that the existing transmission line will be selected as a
candidate if its sensitivity (SSW) is higher than or equal the B. There are both inelastic and elastic demands (Case I)
predefined sensitivity criterion (SEC) as shown in equation Assume that 90% of total demand is inelastic and the rest
(22). On the other hand, in case of building new transmission 10% is elastic. To limit the number of candidates from
line, the transmission line that connects low and high values existing transmission line, the sensitivity criterion SEC is set
of NP should be selected [5]. Here, a new transmission line to be $1/hour. On the other hand, a new transmission line will
will be selected as a candidate if the nodal price difference be selected as candidate if the nodal price difference between
between each two buses is greater than the nodal price each two buses is greater than or equal $5/MWh (NPC =
criterion NPC as shown in equation (23). $5/MWh). The bidding parameter of GENCO ml is
SSW . SEC (22) represented using Weibul distribution with = 3, a = 4, =

INPA - NPB NPC (23) 1.05 The parameter m2 is represented using Normal
distribution with = 200 and f = 1. On the other hand, the
12. Determine SWC and NCc of all candidate plans by using
algorithm from step 1 to step 10. bidding parameters of DISCO DHP and DLP are represented
13. Apply the decision making criteria and selected the using Normal distribution with = 100 and 40 and f = 10 and
most appreciate plan. 4, respectively. Price cap is set to be $1000/MWh. The
uncertainties of generation and load are represented using a
IV. SIMULATION set of generation-load patterns. The number of generation-load
patterns (P) is 5. The probabilities are 0.250000, 0.250000,
A. Test System and Basic Parameters 0.250000, 0.244292 and 0.005708 for patterns 1 to 5
The modified IEEJ West 10-machine system in Fig. 4 is respectively. Data (MW) of each pattern can be found in
used for this study. This system consists of 10 GENCOs (GI Appendix. The number of scenarios (K) in Monte Carlo
to GIO) and 17 DISCOs (LI to L17). The number of simulation is set to be 5000.
generating units is 165. The number of transmission lines The algorithm in Section III has been applied to solve the
before the expansion is 16. All transmission lines consist of 2 transmission expansion planning problem. The average SW
circuits. The real voltage level of system is 500 kV. However, before the expansion (SWo) is 58.4586 million yens. The
because under this voltage level, there will be no congestion, average nodal price (NPo) is shown in Table I. The social
for academic purpose, we will use data based on 275 kV level. welfare sensitivity (STC) of the existing line has been
System data are shown in Appendix. According to [2], there calculated and the result is shown in Table II.
are two types of new line that can be built at this voltage level: According to Tables I and II, we have 33 new transmission
1500 MW ACSR and 3000 MW TACSR types. The line and 2 existing transmission line candidates. SW of all
transmission expansion cost (INV) is calculated by using (24). candidates are calculated and shown in Table III compared
INV = n Cap Leng . (24) with no expansion case. The average SW (SWavg) is computed
where n is the number of new circuits. Because of the from the average value from 5000 scenarios. The minimum
reliability reason in Japan, this value is set to be 2. Cap and TABLE I AVERAGE NODAL PRICE ($/MWH)
Leng are the capacity and length of the transmission line, Bus NPO Bus NPO Bus NPO
respectively. Yis the expansion cost in $/MW/km/hour. This 1
2
48.76
48.76
7
8
48.76
48.86
13
14
48.76
48.76
value is calculated based on the real construction data in [6] 3 48.76 9 61.34 15 48.76
and its value is $0.002/MW/km/hour. 4 48.76 10 48.76 16 48.76
5 48.76 11 48.76 17 48.86
In the case of enhancing the existing transmission line 6 48.76 12 48.76
capacity, assume that capacity cannot be enhanced more than
one-third of its original capacity due to its physical limit. For TABLE II SOCIAL WELFARE SENSITIVITY ($/HOUR)
the 3000 MW transmission, the maximum possible enhanced Branch STC Branch STC Branch STC
1&2 -0.18 13 & 14 -0.01 23 & 24 2.63
capacity is 1000 MW (100 MW step). 3&4 -0.02 15 & 16 0.08 25 & 26 -0.06
i7 refers to the value of lost load (VLL) or the outage cost. 5&6
7&8
-0.03
-0.02
17 & 18
19 & 20
-0.02
0.18
27 & 28
29 & 30
-0.20
19.72
In the England and Wales market [7], VLL is approximately 9 & 10 -0.05 21 & 22 -0.00 31 & 32 0.02
2000-3000 GBP. We set the value of 7 to be $5000/MWh. 11&12 -2.47

4
 5

possible SW (SWmin) is the minimum SW among 5000 TABLE IV COMPARISON RESULT OF OPTIMAL PLAN (CASE I)
scenarios. The probability that SW > SWr,i (ProbSW) is the T Approach A | Approach B Approach C
New 3000 MW New 1500 MW New 3000 MW
number of scenarios that SW is higher than SWr,i divides by Considereig
Conidn line between bus line between bus line between bus
5000. SWeri is the SWavg of case that the transmission line is 5 and bus 9 9 and bus 17 4 and bus 9
not expanded or enhanced. Neglecting
reliability
New 3000 MW
line between bus
New 1500 MW
line between bus
New 3000 MW
line between bus
5 and bus 9 9 and bus 16 5 and bus 9
C. There is only inelastic demand (Case II)
In this case, we assume that all demand is inelastic. As a TABLE V COMPARISON RESULT OF OPTIMAL PLAN (CASE II)
_ Approach A | Approach B Approach C
result, (16) is used as objective function instead of (8). New 1500 MW New 1500 MW New 1500 MW
In the present paper, three following decision making Considereig
Conidn line between bus line between bus line between bus
9 and bus 10 4 and bus 9 9 and bus 10
approaches have been employed. Neglecting New 3000 MW New 1500 MW New 3000 MW
Approach A - Average value approach: Under this reliability line between bus line between bus line between bus
5 and bus 9 9 and bus 16 5 and bus 9
approach, the optimal plan is the plan that provides the highest
SWavg (or lowest TCag for case II). GENCO and DISCO bids and expansion cost. Load elasticity
Approach B - Risk-based approach: Under this approach, does not effect on the decision because optimal plan is
the optimal plan is the plan that provides the maximum SWmin determined from only the operating and expansion cost only.
(or minimum TCmax for case II). In contrast, when the reliability is considered, the result
Approach C - Probabilistic-based criterion approach: By between Cases I and II are different because the cost of
using this approach the optimal plan is the plan that provides reliability has been taken into account. The optimal plans of
the highest ProbSW. Case I when consider and neglect reliability have same trend
Different decision making method may result in different in term of position and capacity while this is not true in Case
optimal plan. There is no general agree about which approach II. It is because the effect of reliability cost (EENS) in Case I
is the best. It depends on the decision maker. We will not is smaller than Case II (EENS in Case II is about 46 MWh).
conclude in this point. The optimal plan according to each In Case II, Approaches A and C of considering reliability
decision making method is shown in Tables IV and V for cases result in lower required capacity of new transmission
Cases I and II, respectively. Results are compared with those line compared with neglecting reliability case. According to
obtained from the case where reliability has been neglected (16), the main possible reasons are as follows:
(availability of generation/transmission facility is ignored). 1. For new line between buses 9 and 10, 1500 MW line is
When the reliability is neglected, the optimal plan has been enough to improve the reliability. There is no difference in
selected based on social welfare which is derived from CIC between adding 1500 and 3000 MW lines. Moreover, a
TABLE III COMPARISON BETWEEN EACH CANDIDATE
Candidate Plan Capacity (MW) SW,g (million dollars/hour) SW,i (million dollars/hour) ProbSW EENS (MWh)
No expansion/enhancement 0 58.4586 58.0228 0.5718 1.2869
New line between bus I and bus 9 1500 58.4977 58.0426 0.7994 1.2789
New line between bus I and bus 9 3000 58.4937 58.0346 0.7790 1.2789
New line between bus 2 and bus 9 1500 58.5002 58.0447 0.8116 1.2789
New linebetween bus 2 and bus 9 3000 58.4981 58.0067 0.7954 1.2789
New line between bus 3 and bus 9 1500 58.4986 58.0360 0.8134 1.2796
New line between bus 3 and bus 9 3000 58.5016 58.0045 0.8056 1.2796
New line between bus 4 and bus 9 1500 58.4941 58.0354 0.8024 1.2799
New line between bus 4 and bus 9 3000 58.5055 58.0167 0.8218 1.2799
New line between bus 5 and bus 9 1500 58.4873 58.0325 0.7710 1.2800
New line between bus 5 and bus 9 3000 58.5071 57.9800 0.8192 1.2800
New line between bus 6 and bus 9 1500 58.4789 58.0341 0.7214 1.2826
New line between bus 6 and bus 9 3000 58.5048 57.9772 0.8094 1.2826
New line between bus 7 and bus 9 1500 58.4670 58.0314 0.6364 1.2833
New line between bus 7 and bus 9 3000 58.4987 58.0319 0.7956 1.2833
New line between bus 8 and bus 9 3000 58.4773 58.0422 0.7054 1.2840
New line between bus 9 and bus I0 1500 58.4992 58.0377 0.8042 1.2707
New line betweenbus 9 and bus lO 3000 58.4959 58.0071 0.7862 1.2707
New line between bus 9 and busl 1 1500 58.5004 58.0366 0.8148 1.2740
New line between bus 9 and busl 1 3000 58.4994 58.0026 0.8022 1.2740
New line between bus 9 and bus 12 1500 58.4994 58.0314 0.8146 1.2741
New line between bus 9 and bus l2 3000 58.5022 58.0003 0.8110 1.2741
New line between bus 9 and bus 13 1500 58.4939 58.0280 0.7930 1.2686
New line between bus 9 and bus 13 3000 58.5039 57.9783 0.8112 1.2682
New line between bus 9 and bus 14 1500 58.4881 58.0182 0.7642 1.2773
Newlinebetween bus9andbusl4 3000 58.5035 57.9780 0.8040 1.2773
New line between bus 9 and bus 15 1500 58.4809 58.0104 0.7252 1.2799
New line between bus 9 and bus 15 3000 58.4962 58.0110 0.7832 1.2799
New line between bus 9 and bus 16 1500 58.4956 58.0160 0.7802 1.2833
New line between bus 9 and bus 16 3000 58.4950 58.0104 0.7782 1.2833
New line between bus 9 and bus 17 1500 58.4765 58.0476 0.6984 1.2774
New line between bus 9 and bus 17 3000 58.4763 58.0462 0.6974 1.2774
Enhancement branch 23 and branch 24 100 58.4547 58.0211 0.5722 1.2867
Enhancement branch 29 and branch 30 100 58.4576 58.0279 0.5720 1.2869

5
 6

double INV is needed to build 3000 instead of 1500 MW line GENERATING UNIT DATA
while only a few GBC has been reduced. GENCO Capacity (MW) Number of Units Availability
2. For new line between buses 5 and 9 in neglecting GI 1000 12 0.930
reliability case, the benefit from reducing in GBC is greater 750 2 0.910
than INV. Therefore 3000 MW line become the optimal plan. G2 1000 9 0.925
G3 1000 9 0.920
G4 700 12 0.930
V. CONCLUSION
200 3 0.900
In this paper, a new method to determine an optimal G5 700 12 0.925
transmission expansion taking into account social welfare and 200 3 0.920
reliability has been proposed. Two types of expansion: G6 700 12 0.925
building new line and enhancing of the existing line capacity 200 3 0.930
have been considered. The combined approach between G7 700 12 0.910
analytical method and Monte Carlo simulation and three 200 3 0.940
decision making approaches using probabilistic-based and G8 250 18 0.910
risk-based criteria have been applied to determine the most G9 700 12 0.935
200 3 0.990
appropriate plan. The modified IEEJ West 10-machine system
GIO 700 35 0.925
has been used for study. Results between considering and
500 5 0.910
neglecting reliability have been compared and discussed.
Redispatch Process
VI. APPENDIX
GENERATION LOAD PATTERN DATA (MW)
-
The purpose of redispatch is to minimize the redispatch
Participant Pattern 1 Pattern 2 Pattern 3 Pattern 4 Pattern 5 cost and curtailment in the following way:
NUP NDO
GI 8000 10000 12000 13500 13500
G2 6000 7000 9000 9000 9000
min RCC= ((rp.Agi)+(NP,.gi))+ (NPi.(gi-Agi))
i=1 i=1
G3 6000 7000 9000 9000 9000 NDO M M

G4 4900 6300 9000 9000 9000

+ E (NPi Agi) - E (Ij EENSj) .NP,
- + E (q.EENSj)
G5 4900 6300 9000 9000 9000 i=l 1=1 1=1
G6 4900 6300 9000 9000 9000
Here, NUP and NDO are the numbers of generators that
G7 4900 6300 9000 9000 9000
scheduled up and scheduled down in the redispatch process,
G8 3750 3750 4500 4500 4500
G9 6300 6300 9000 9000 9000
respectively. gi and Ij are the original scheduled outputs of i-th
GIO 16500 20700 23500 27000 27000 generator andj-th load. rp is the reserve price, NPi is the price
LI 3750 4500 8160 10200 12000 at node of i-th generator, NPj is the prices at node ofj-th load.
L2 1000 1200 2380 2975 3500 Ag, is the amount of power of i-th generator to be changed in
L3 1000 1200 2380 2975 3500 the redispatch process. EENSj is the amount of power of j-th
L4 1000 1200 2380 2975 3500 load to be curtailed in the redispatch process, M is the number
L5 1000 1200 2380 2975 3500 of loads, i7 is the value of lost load.
L6 1000 1200 2380 2975 3500
L7 1500 1800 3570 4462.5 5250 VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
L8 1000 1200 2380 2975 3500
L9 16500 19800 19244 24055 28300
This work has been supported by the Japan Society for the
LIO 2600 3120 3740 4675 5500 Promotion of Science under the project JSPS Postdoctoral
Lll 2600 3120 3740 4675 5500 Fellowship for foreign researcher in Japan (P03226).
L12 2600 3120 3740 4675 5500
L13 2600 3120 3740 4675 5500 VIII. REFERENCES
L14 2600 3120 3740 4675 5500 [1] L. L. Lai, Power System Restructuring and Deregulation Trading,
L15 2200 2640 3740 4675 5500 Performance and Information Technology, John Wiley & Sons, LTD
L16 1700 2040 1870 2337.5 2750 2001.
[2] http://ieeO0.iee.or.jp/pes/model/kakuj'u/index.html
L17 2600 3120 3740 4675 5500
[3] R. Fang and D. J. Hill, "A New Strategy for Transmission Expansion in
TRANSMISSION LINE DATA Competitive Electricity Markets," IEEE Trans. Power System, vol. 18,
no. 1, pp. 374-380, Feb. 2003.
Branch From To x (P.U.) Branch From To x (P.U.)
1,2 1 2 0.0630 17,18 5 13 0.0315 [4] http://www.iso-ne.com/smd/mis_reports/
3,4 2 3 0.0630 19,20 6 7 0.0630 [5] M. 0. Buygi, G. Balzer, H. M. Shanechi and M. Shahidehpour, "Market-
5,6 2 10 0.0315 21,22 6 14 0.0315 Based Transmission Expansion Planning," IEEE Trans. Power System,
7,8 3 4 0.0630 23,24 7 8 0.0630 vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 2060-2067, Nov. 2003.
9,10 3 11 0.0315 25,26 7 15 0.0315 [6] http://www.tepco.co.jp/cc/press/98 112502-j.html
11,12 4 5 0.0630 27,28 7 16 0.0630 [7] L. Ma, F. Wen, Y. Ni and F. F. Wu, "Optimal Bidding Strategies for
13,14 4 12 0.0315 29,30 8 9 0.0630 Generation Companies in Electricity Markets with Transmission
15,16 5 6 0.0630 31,32 8 17 0.0315
Capacity Constraints Taken into Account," in 2003 IEEE Power
*
Capacity and availability of all lines are 3000 MW and 0.99, respectively. Engineering Society General Meeting., vol. 4, pp. 2605-26 10.