Università Degli Studi Di Pavia

Università degli Studi di Pavia
Dottorato di Ricerca in Ingegneria

Elettronica, Informatica ed Elettrica
XXIII Ciclo
The need to coordinate generation and

transmission planning and to ensure a secure
and e-cient reactive power provision: two key
aspects of the restructured electricity industry
Tesi di Dottorato di:
Ing. Ilaria Siviero
Relatore:
Chiar.mo Prof. Paolo Marannino

Anno Accademico 2009/2010
Contents
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Research motivations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.1 Generation and transmission planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.2 Reactive support and voltage control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Research objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 Thesis outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2 WTLR and power system planning 9
2.1 Power system planning and electricity market e-ciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.1.1 Electricity market e-ciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.1.2 Generation system investments and Social Welfare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.1.3 Transmission system expansion and Social Welfare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.1.4 General considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.2 Power system planning and network security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2.1 Measuring system security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2.2 Generation expansion and power system security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2.2.1 Overload mitigation strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2.3 Transmission planning and power system security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.2.3.1 WTLR and transmission planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.3 Matlab-coded program for WTLR sensitivity calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.3.1 Step 1: security analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.3.2 Step 2: ISDF calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.3.2.1 Distribution factor formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.3.2.2 Post-contingency distribution factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.3.3 Step 3: WTLR calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.3.4 Step 4: WTLR graphical representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.4 Application of the procedure to the CIGRE 63-bus system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.4.1 Simulation hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.4.2 Base case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.4.3 WTLR-based generation expansion and network security . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.4.4 WTLR-based grid development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.4.4.1 WTLR procedure results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2.4.4.2 A WTLR-based metric for transmission planning . . . . . . . . . . 41
2.4.4.3 Validation of the WTLR-based metric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
2.4.4.4 An index to prioritize transmission planning . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
i
CONTENTS ii
2.5 Changes in the original Matlab-coded procedure

................... 45
2.5.1 Introduction of the Line Outage Distribution Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
2.5.1.1 LODF formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
2.5.1.2 Application to the CIGRE 63-bus system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
2.5.1.3 Using the base ISDFs to compute WTLR sensitivities . . . . . . . 50
2.5.2 Adoption of the distributed slack bus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.5.2.1 Impact of the choice of the slack bus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.5.2.2 Distributed slack bus
......................... 53
2.6 Tests on the Italian EHV system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
2.6.1 The MVA rating approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
2.6.1.1 Original procedure results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
2.6.1.2 Check by a standard steady-state security assessment tool
.... 58
2.6.1.3 Considering the actual voltage magnitudes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2.6.1.4 Considering the actual power ow limits
.............. 60
2.6.1.5 Conclusions on the Matlab-coded procedure for WTLR calculation
61
2.6.2 WTLR sensitivity: a tool with several uses
.................. 62
2.6.2.1 GENCO viewpoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
2.6.2.2 TSO viewpoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
2.6.2.3 Interchangeability of generation expansion and transmission devel-
opment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
2.7 Chapter conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
3 Reactive power service 91
3.1 Ancillary services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

3.1.1 Denitions in the U.S. markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
3.1.2 Ancillary services in Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
3.1.3 The Italian ancillary services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
3.2 Reactive power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
3.2.1 What is reactive power? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
3.2.2 The need for reactive power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
3.2.3 Reactive power and blackouts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
3.3 Reactive power support as ancillary service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
3.3.1 Technical issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
3.3.2 Policy issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
3.3.3 A challenge for System Operator and Regulatory Authority . . . . . . . . . 101
3.3.3.1 Optimal provision for reactive power service . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
3.3.3.2 The eect of reactive power on real power and system security . . 101
3.3.3.3 Reactive power management: dispatch versus procurement . . . . 103
3.3.3.4 Reactive power remuneration schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
3.3.3.5 Energy price volatility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
3.3.3.6 Reactive market power ...
..................... 103
3.4 Reactive power management review ...
....................... 104
3.4.1 Reactive power service in dierent deregulated markets
........... 104
3.4.1.1 North America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
3.4.1.2 Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
CONTENTS iii
3.4.2 Literature on reactive power pricing and management . . . . . . . . . . . .106

3.4.3 Possible policy solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
3.4.3.1 Decoupling of real and reactive power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
3.4.3.2 Zonal reactive power management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
3.4.3.3 Alternative sources of reactive power supply ...
......... 108
3.5 Architecture of voltage control system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
3.5.1 Hierarchical voltage control system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
3.5.1.1 Basic SVR and TVR concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
3.6 Reactive power service in Italy ...
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
3.6.1 Current regulatory framework in Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
3.6.2 Reactive power service by generators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
3.6.3 The Italian network voltage control system ...
............... 115
3.6.3.1 Selection of pilot nodes, control areas, and control plants . . . . . 116
3.7 Optimal Reactive Power Flow program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
3.7.1 Compact reduced ORPF model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
3.7.2 Reactive power value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
3.8 Wind energy exploitation and reactive power support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
3.8.1 Technical performance requirements for connection of wind farms . . . . . . 123
3.8.1.1 Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
3.8.1.2 Spain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
3.8.1.3 Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
3.8.2 Technology solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
3.8.2.1 WTG based reactive power compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
3.8.2.2 External reactive power compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
3.9 Tests on the Italian EHV network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
3.9.1 Main assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
3.9.1.1 Wind power production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
3.9.1.2 SVR control areas, pilot nodes, and controlling generators . . . . . 131
3.9.2 Test cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
3.9.3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
3.9.3.1 Test case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
3.9.3.2 Test case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
3.9.3.3 Test case 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
3.9.3.4 Test cases 4 and 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
3.9.3.5 Real losses' variation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
3.10 Chapter conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
4 Conclusions 164
A CIGRE-63 bus test system 166
B Power Distribution Factors 169
B.1 Basic distribution factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

B.2 Impact of changes in network topology and parameter values . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
B.2.1 Outage of a line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
B.2.2 Closure of a line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
CONTENTS iv
C Slack bus modeling in load ow solutions 174

C.1 Single slack bus power ow ...
............................ 174
C.2 Distributed slack bus power ow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
C.2.1 Participation factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
D Devices for reactive power support 179

D.1 Synchronous generators ...
.............................. 179
D.2 Distributed generators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
D.3 Synchronous condensers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
D.4 Supervar machines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
D.5 Shunt capacitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
D.6 Shunt reactors ...
................................... 182
D.7 Series capacitors ...
.................................. 182
D.8 Flexible AC Transmission Systems (FACTS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
D.8.1 Static Var Compensators ...
......................... 182
D.8.2 Static Synchronous Compensators ...
.................... 183
D.8.3 Static Synchronous Series Compensators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
D.8.4 D-var (Dynamic Var) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
D.8.5 Distributed SMES (D-SMES) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
D.8.6 Unied Power Flow Controllers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
D.8.7 Interline Power Flow Controllers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
D.9 Wind generators ...
.................................. 184
D.10 User plants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
D.11 Transmission lines ...
................................. 184
D.11.1 High voltage DC transmission lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
D.12 Transformers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
D.12.1 Transformer taps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
D.12.2 Phase Shifting Transformers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
D.13 Dierences among equipment types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
E Italian hierarchical voltage control 188

E.1 Secondary Voltage Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
E.1.1 SART apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
E.1.2 RVR apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
E.2 Tertiary Voltage Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
E.2.1 NVR apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
E.3 Control system algorithms and dynamics design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
List of Figures
2.1 Graph illustrating consumer and producer surpluses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.2 Productive e-ciency + Allocative ine-ciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3 Productive ine-ciency + Allocative e-ciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.4 Productive ine-ciency + Allocative ine-ciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.5 Eects of a capacity expansion investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.6 Eects of a cost reducing investment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.7 Technological investments and market e-ciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.8 Overload mitigation strategy using generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.9 Transmission relief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.10 Network equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.11 Example of le with contingency analysis results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.12 Example of le with overloaded branches' ranking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.13 Example of le with WTLR sensitivities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.14 Example of contourf result for WTLR graphical representation . . . . . . . . . . 30
2.15 Example of WTLR graphical representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2.16 CIGRE 63-bus test system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2.17 WTLR graphical representation - Base case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.18 Node 33V1 WTLR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.19 System overload - New generator at node 33V1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.20 Node 5M1 WTLR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.21 System overload - New generator at node 5M1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.22 Node 66M1 WTLR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.23 System overload - New generator at node 66M1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.24 Network reinforcements for CIGRE 63-bus system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2.25 Total system overload for all test cases (decreasing order) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
2.26 WTLR algebraic sum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
2.27 Social Welfare for all test cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
2.28 Impact of the transaction t 46
st . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.29 Density function of the relative errors in line ow approximations . . . . . . . . . . 48
2.30 Cumulative distribution function of errors in line ow approximations . . . . . . . 48
2.31 Relative error on WTLR sensitivities using LODFs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
2.32 ISDF error density function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.33 Scatter plot of the relative errors as a function of the ISDF magnitudes . . . . . . 52
2.34 Eect of the approximations on WTLR sensitivities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
2.35 WTLR values with dierent slack buses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
v
LIST OF FIGURES vi
2.36 Cumulative distribution function of jDSISDF ISDF j . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
2.37 Impact of adopting a distributed slack bus model on WTLRs . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
2.38 Outaged and overloaded 380 kV lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
2.39 Impact of the MVA rating approximation on WTLRs
................ 61
2.40 Geographical and virtual Italian zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
2.41 WTLR map - Italian EHV system (year 2013) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
2.42 Possible new generation sites (year 2013) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
2.43 Possible new generation sites (year 2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
2.44 WTLR map - Italian EHV system (year 2009) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
2.45 Critical grid areas of the current Italian transmission system [23] . . . . . . . . . . 70
2.46 WTLR map - Scenarios A (top) and B (bottom) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
2.47 WTLR map - Scenarios C (top) and D (bottom) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
2.48 Wind generation capacity installed in Italy at the end of 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
2.49 Wind generation capacity expected in the medium-term . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
2.50 WTLR map - Scenarios A (top) and B (bottom) without the new wind farms . . .
78
2.51 Network reinforcements considered in the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
2.52 WTLR algebraic sum
.................................. 83
2.53 WTLR map (Benevento-Foggia reinforcement)
.................... 84
2.54 WTLR map (middle-Adriatic backbone reinforcement) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
2.55 WTLR map (new line Montecorvino-Benevento)
................... 85
2.56 WTLR map (new line Deliceto-Bisaccia) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
3.1 Example of a synchronous generator loading capability diagram . . . . . . . . . . .

102
3.2 Hierarchical structure for transmission network voltage control
........... 111
3.3 Italian regulation for voltage control and reactive exchanges . . . . . . . . . . . . .
112
3.4 Minimum requirement for the network-side reactive power supply - Germany . . . 125
3.5 PQ diagram of the wind energy plant at the grid connection point - Germany . . . 126
3.6 Common WTG electrical topologies ...
....................... 128
3.7 Geographic location of the fteen wind collection substations . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
3.8 SVR areas for the Italian EHV system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
3.9 SVR areas and controlling generators - North Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
3.10 SVR areas and controlling generators - Adriatic side . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
3.11 SVR areas and controlling generators - Tyrrhenian side
............... 134
@Q
3.12 Sensitivities @Q
P;k
- Choice of the pilot node of SVR area 7 . . . . . . . . . . . .
135
j;k
@Q
P;k
136
j;k
@Q
P;k
136
j;k
@Q
P;k
- Area 2 (Baggio) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
137
j;k
@Q
P;k
- Generating units of La Casella and
Piacenza . . . . . . . . . 137
j;k
@Q
P;k
- Generating units of Torviscosa and Monfalcone . . . . . . . .
138
j;k
3.18 Reactive power margins under AVR control (areas of Dolo, Forlì, and Villanova) . 143
3.19 Nodal marginal values of reactive power - Area 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
LIST OF FIGURES vii
3.28 Nodal marginal values of reactive power - Area 10 ...
............... 148
............... 149
............... 149
............... 150
3.32 SVR voltage prole of pilot nodes - Case 1 and Case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
3.33 Reactive marginal values in pilot nodes - Case 1 and Case 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
153
¿
3.34 Map of nodal /Mvarh indicators - Case 2 ...
................... 154
3.35 Reactive power margins in Central-Southern Italy - Case 1 and Case 3 . . . . . . .
155
3.36 Reactive marginal values in pilot nodes - Case 1 and Case 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
156
3.37 Reactive marginal values in wind collector substations - Case 1 and Case 3 ...
. 157
3.38 Reactive marginal values in wind collector substations - Case 1 and Case 4 ...
. 159
3.39 Voltage prole of pilot nodes - Case 2 and Case 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
A.1 CIGRE 63-bus test system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
C.1 Flow-chart of a single slack bus load ow ...

.................... 177
D.1 An example of synchronous generator output capability curve [117] . . . . . . . . .

180
E.1 Hierarchical voltage control for the Italian EHV system ...
............ 189
List of Tables
2.1 Contingency list (CIGRE 63-bus system) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

2.2 Thermoelectric generation prole (CIGRE 63-bus system) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.3 Contingency analysis results - Base case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.4 WTLR sensitivities - Base case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
2.5 Security analysis results for all test cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
2.6 Security analysis results - New line 1M1-5M1 or 2M1-5M1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2.7 WTLR sensitivities - New line 1M1-5M1 or 2M1-5M1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2.8 ¿ 43
Economic indicators for all test cases ( /h) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.9 Index validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
2.10 Contingency analysis results by using LODFs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
2.11 Contingency analysis results with dierent slack buses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
2.12 Participation factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
2.13 Contingency analysis results using the distributed slack bus power ow . . . . . . . 55
2.14 Contingency analysis results (original procedure) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
2.15 WTLR sensitivities (original procedure) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
2.16 Check by a standard steady-state security assessment tool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2.17 Contingency analysis results (considering the actual voltage magnitudes) . . . . . . 60
2.18 Contingency analysis results (considering the actual power ow limits) . . . . . . . 61
2.19 OPF results (year 2013) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
2.20 OPF results (year 2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
2.21 Contingency analysis results (without doubling the Adriatic backbone) . . . . . . . 67
2.22 Priority list of the new generation sites (year 2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
2.23 Contingency analysis results (year 2009) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
2.24 Scenarios for assessing Italian EHV development plan benets . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
2.25 Main grid reinforcements (2010 development plan) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
2.26 Contingency analysis results - Scenario A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
2.27 Contingency analysis results - Scenario B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
2.28 Contingency analysis results - Scenario C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
2.29 Contingency analysis results - Scenario D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
2.30 Contingency analysis results (Benevento-Foggia reinforcement) . . . . . . . . . . . 80
2.31 Contingency analysis results (middle-Adriatic backbone reinforcement) . . . . . . . 80
2.32 Contingency analysis results (new line Montecorvino-Benevento) . . . . . . . . . . 81
2.33 Contingency analysis results (new line Deliceto-Bisaccia) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
2.34 Summary of the contingency analysis results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
2.35 Contingency analysis results (New CCGT power plants) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
viii
LIST OF TABLES ix
2.36 WTLR values at some nodes in Central-South Italy
................. 87
3.1 Payments by Italian consumers for excess withdrawal of reactive energy . . . . . .

113
3.2 Bonus/penalty for reactive power as percentage of reference tari - Spain
..... 127
3.3 Wind power collection substations ...
........................ 130
3.4 Generation marginal costs of dierent thermoelectric technologies . . . . . . . . . .
131
3.5 OPF results (maximum wind power generation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
3.6 Sensitivities @Q@QP;k - Decoupling requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
A;h
3.7 Diagonal-dominance of the matrix @Q@QP;k . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

A;k
@Q
...................................
P;k
140
j;k
3.9 Pilot node voltages and reactive power productions - Case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

142
3.10 Losses' gradient and nodal marginal value in pilot nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
151
155
158
159
3.15 Real losses and their variations with reference to Case 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
161
A.1 Generator buses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

A.2 Load buses ...
..................................... 168
A.3 Transmission lines ...
................................. 168
D.1 Characteristics of voltage-control equipment [43]

................... 186
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Research motivations

Electricity markets around the world were for a long time either formed by vertically-
integrated, state-owned companies, or private rms subject to governmental regulation that
were often monop-olies within their supply area. By the end of the century liberalization
processes had been initiated in many countries all over the world, although the process
slowed after the dramatic failure of the California market in 2000-2001.
The change to free markets is based on several economic and policy motivations that dier strongly
from country to country. The primary reason for introducing competition in the developed coun-tries
(e. g. North America and Western Europe) is to increase the competition, and thereby also the
economic e-ciency in the operation of the electrical power system. For fast developing countries (e.
g. China and India), the typical reason is to create a more level playing eld to attract private
investment, thereby relieving the government in funding the electric sector's growth that is cru-cial to
economic development. In addition the technological advancement of gas-red turbines, in particular
highly e-cient combined cycle turbines, have broken the dominance of coal and nuclear plants and
signicantly lowered barriers to entry for private investors in generation.
Several approaches and measurements have been taken, including:

restructuring: reorganizing the roles of market participants (including regulators
and insti-tutions), not necessarily a deregulation of the market;

liberalization: synonym of restructuring with the aim of obtaining competitive markets;

corporatization: make state-owned institutions act like private ones;

privatization: selling state-owned assets to private stakeholders;

deregulation: removing or simplifying government rules and regulations that
constrain the operation of market forces.
Successful liberalization generally requires: sector restructuring, implementation of

competitive wholesale markets and retail supply, incentive regulation of the grid,
independent regulation, and privatization.
Nevertheless, these processes have given rise to various issues in both planning and
operating the electric energy systems.
1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 2
1.1.1 Generation and transmission planning
In the past, the electricity industry featured vertically integrated utilities. As a consequence,
transmission planning was closely coupled to generation planning. Utilities, because they owned
generation and transmission, could optimize investments across both kinds of assets considering
their interchangeability. With respect to operations, utilities routinely scheduled generation day-
ahead and re-dispatched generating units in real-time to prevent the occurrence of congestions. The
costs of such scheduling and re-dispatch were spread across all customers and reected in retail
rates. In addition, utilities had good data and forecasting tools to estimate current and future loads
and generating capacity. Because each utility was the sole provider of retail electricity services, it
had considerable information on current and likely future load levels and shapes. Since each utility
was the primary investor in new generation, it had considerable information on the timing, types,
and locations of new generation and corresponding information on the retirement of existing units.
Finally, the amount of wholesale electricity commerce was much less than it is today and it was
much simpler.
In today's electricity industry, generation and transmission are increasingly separated,
either through functional unbundling of these activities or through corporate separation.
This de-integration, combined with the competitive nature of electricity generation, makes
it much harder for transmission planners to coordinate their activities with those of
generation owners. Speci-cally, transmission planners need detailed information on the
timing, magnitudes, and locations of new generating units; the developers of these
facilities are unwilling to share competitive informa-tion until required to do so (e. g. for
environmental permits and for transmission-interconnection studies).
One critical outcome of the de-integration of generation and transmission, the advent of many new
players (brokers, marketers, and power producers), and the consequent increasing number of
commercial transactions is the more frequent stressing of the transmission grid due to the
occurrence of congestion situations. One of the main reasons for the increasing frequency of
congestion is that the transmission network investments have not kept pace with the increasing
demand for transmission services. In the short-term, the only way to deal with the congestion
problem is through eective congestion management, i. e. through deploying e-cient procedures to
coordinate all participants' actions to maintain system reliability. Of necessity, congestion
management is no longer an internal matter, but it involves a system operator, transmission owners
(if dierent from the system operator), power producers, and load-serving entities. But congestion
has rather serious long-term market eects, and consequently impacts the decisions regarding new
investments in both transmission and generation.
Congestion impacts market players in many dierent ways. Congestion may prevent the use of
lower-priced generators to meet the load and consequently may result in a generation/demand
schedule with higher total costs and entailing losses of market e-ciency. Also, congestion facilitates
the opportunities to exercise market power through gaming by some players to increase their pro ts.
Since in a competitive electricity market framework the grid is the interface where buyers and sellers
interact with each other, one of the main objectives of network planning is to provide a
nondiscriminatory competitive environment for all stakeholders while maintaining power system
reliability. Therefore, increasing transmission capacity is likely to be necessary to encourage and
facilitate competition among electric market participants, to provide nondiscriminatory access to cheap
generation for all consumers, to alleviate transmission congestion, and to mitigate the
possible exercise of local market power, as well as to increase the network reliability and
security. Although generation and transmission planning is no longer an integrated process, as
it used to be in the past, generation expansion decisions may be aected by decisions on
transmission expansion and vice versa. For instance, a transmission project may take ve or ten
years, longer than two years or so for building a gas turbine or a combined cycle power plant. A
generation project may be initiated after the transmission project has commenced, potentially
altering the nancial assumptions used to justify the transmission project. There is also the
substitution eect of transmission, that is, the transmission expansion can cause the substitution
(in production) of some expensive power plants, originally dispatched because of binding
network constraints. So generators are aected by transmission enhancements which will either
expand their market opportunities (if they are low-cost) or reduce their market opportunities (if
they are high-cost and have captive customers).
Producers' expansion investments and transmission development plans may conict because of
the diversity of their respective interests: on one hand, generation capacity expansion may
worsen existing network congestions and even compromise the eectiveness of a planned grid
reinforcement; on the other hand, the development plan of the transmission system can
inuence the planning decisions taken by power producers, even discouraging the construction
of new power plants, and moreover transmission capacity increase may be not su-cient to allow
existing and planned power plants to be fully exploited.
Furthermore, the competitive business environment of generation pushes investors to faster plan-
ning, shorter deployment times, and less sharing of commercially sensitive information. The reg-
ulated business environment of transmission pushes it to slower planning and longer deployment
times (to accommodate an inclusive public process) and the wide sharing of information.
In conclusion, the split and dierences between competitive generation and regulated
transmis-sion can lead to investment decisions in both sectors that are sub-optimal
from a broad societal perspective.
1.1.2 Reactive support and voltage control

The main function of an electrical power system is to transport electrical power from
generators to loads. In order to function properly, it is essential that the voltage is kept
close to the nominal value, in the entire power system.
Voltage control is in fact necessary because of the capacitance, resistance, and inductance of
trans-formers, lines, and cables. Since branches have a capacitance, resistance, and
inductance, a current owing through a branch causes a voltage dierence between the ends of
the branch (i. e. between the nodes being connected by the branch). However, even though
there is a voltage dierence between the two ends of the branch, the bus voltage is not allowed
to deviate from its nominal value in excess of a certain value (normally 5% to 10%).
Appropriate measures must be taken to prevent such deviation. Voltage control refers to the
task of keeping the bus voltages in the system within the required limits and of preventing any
deviation from the nominal value to become larger than allowed.
The node voltage is a local quantity, as opposed to system frequency, which is a global or system-wide
quantity. It is therefore not possible to control the voltage at a certain bus from any point in the system,
as is the case with frequency. Instead, the voltage of a certain node can be controlled only at that
particular node or in its direct vicinity.
This is achieved dierently for transmission networks and for distribution grids because of the dierent
characteristics of the branches in transmission networks and distribution grids and the divergent
numbers and characteristics of the generators connected to both. Transmission networks mainly
consist of overhead lines with very low resistance. The voltage dierence between two ends of a line
with a high inductive reactance X when compared with its resistance R (i. e. with a low
R=X ratio) is strongly aected by what is called the reactive power ow through the line.
Owing to the characteristics of transmission networks and the connected generators, voltages
are controlled principally by changing the reactive power generation or consumption of large-
scale centralized generators connected to the transmission network. They are very exible in
operation and allow a continuous control of reactive power generation over a wide range,
according to their loading capability diagram. Sometimes, dedicated equipment is used, e. g.
capacitor banks or technologies referred to as exible AC transmission systems (FACTS). These
are, in principle, controllable reactive power sources.
In contrast, distribution grids consist of overhead lines or underground cables in which the resis-
tance is not negligible when compared with the inductance (i. e. that have a much higher R=X
ratio than transmission lines). Therefore, the impact of reactive power on bus voltages is less
pronounced than in the case of transmission networks. Further, the generators connected to
dis-tribution grids are not always capable of varying their reactive power output for contributing
to voltage control. So voltages in distribution grids are controlled mainly by changing the turns
ratio of the transformer that connects the distribution grid to the higher voltage level and
sometimes also by devices that generate or consume reactive power, such as shunt reactors
and capacitors. In general, distribution grids oer fewer possibilities for voltage control.
By using large-scale power plants to regulate voltages in the transmission network and
by using dedicated devices in distribution grids to regulate the voltages at the
distribution level, a well-designed, traditional power system can keep the voltage at all
nodes within the allowed band width.
This was the approach traditionally adopted, when vertically integrated utilities
operated power generating units, on the one hand, and power transmission and
distribution systems, on the other hand. They also handled the voltage control issue,
both short-term (day-to-day dispatch of units) and long-term (system planning).
Owing to recent developments, this situation has been however changed. The liberalisation and
restructuring of the electricity industry has resulted in the unbundling of power generation and grid
operation. These activities are no longer combined in vertically integrated utilities as they used to be.
As a consequence, voltage control is no longer a natural part of the planning and dispatch of power
plants. Now, independent generation companies carry out the planning and dispatch, and, in the
long term, conventional power stations that are considered unprotable will be closed down without
considering their importance for grid voltage control. In addition, the grid companies have to solve
any voltage control problem that may result from the decisions taken by generation companies. In
the short term, this can be done by requiring the generation companies to re-dispatch. In the long
term, additional equipment for controlling the voltage can be installed. Moreover, the voltage control
and the reactive power support are now considered an ancillary service that grid companies often
have to remunerate. Another recent development is that generation is shifted from the transmission
network to the distribution grid. As a result of these two developments (unbundling and
decentralisation), it is becoming more di-cult to control the voltage in the entire transmission network
from conventional power stations only. Grid companies
respond by installing dedicated voltage control equipment and by requiring generation

equipment to have reactive power capabilities independent of the applied technology.
This means that no exception is made for wind power or other renewables any longer,
as has often been the case until now.
In particular, among the recent developments that challenge the traditional approach to voltage
control, there is the increasing exploitation of wind energy for generating electricity. Until few
years ago, most wind turbines have been erected as single plants or in small groups and
connected to distribution grids. Now the attention is shifted towards large-scale wind farms to
be connected to the transmission network. The wind farm aects the power ows and hence the
bus voltages. As regards the transmission network, voltages are controlled mainly by large-
scale conventional power plants. If their capability to control voltages throughout the
transmission grid is not su-cient to compensate for the impact of the wind farms on the node
voltages, the voltage at some buses can no longer be kept within the allowed range around its
nominal value and appropriate measures have to be considered and taken.
Concerning this, two issues are particularly important. The voltage control capabilities of wind
turbines are becoming an increasingly important consideration regarding grid connection to ensure
appropriate voltages at their connection point. So grid codes often include some kind of reactive
power requirement for wind farms, usually expressed in terms of power factor range. Moreover, it is
likely that, thanks to its dispatching priority, the wind power production will replace the power
generation of conventional plants so reducing their voltage control capability. The problem will be
more serious if the wind farms are far from the big load centers, even in remote areas or oshore. So
it may be inevitable to take additional measures to control the grid voltage.
1.2 Research objectives

The research work presented in this thesis investigates the two issues discussed in
the preceding section.
The above considerations have made clear that in liberalised electricity markets there is the need to
better coordinate generation and transmission expansion in order to achieve a more coherent
development of the whole power system, that will favourably aect both system operation and market
e-ciency. The rst part focuses on this issue. A methodology based on the nodal index called
Weighted Transmission Loading Relief, recently proposed in literature, is dened. The WTLR
sensitivity seems to be suited to attain the above-mentioned purpose since it is capable of
measuring the impact of real power injections into the grid on system security. In particular, its basic
concept is that an injection may help to mitigate the overload on a grid branch by creating a counter-
ow, so suggesting the importance of strategic generation siting (i. e. of determining geographic
locations where new generation would enhance the system security by creating post-contingency
counter-ows that would mitigate overloads under contingency conditions). The use of this tool by a
generation owner to assist the denition of its expansion plan may thus favour the system security
enhancement. But this is not a task pertaining to power producers in the restructured electricity
industry. Nevertheless, as explained in the previous section, also generation owners may benet from
strategic generation siting because network bottlenecks may limit the dispatchability of new power
plants and thereby advantage less e-cient ones. The rst objective of the research work is to show this
use of the WTLR tool, while the second purpose is to demonstrate that it can be helpful also to
transmission planners. Consequently, the WTLR methodology could
allow both generation and transmission planning goals to be reached, even though
they are dierent and sometimes in disagreement in a liberalised environment.
Moreover, since the WTLR main objective is the network security enhancement, that
can be achieved also thanks to an appropriate generation expansion, the whole power
system and especially its operation could benet from adopting this approach.
The second part of the research work deals with the reactive power management in post-
deregulation electricity industry. As results from the preceding section, this topic has become much
more impor-tant after the electricity market liberalisation and especially after the unbundling process,
that has led to the de-integration of generation and transmission. There are many important and
crucial aspects concerning this topic, some deriving from the peculiarities of reactive power supply,
some due to the new liberalised environment, some resulting from the increasing interest in
renewable technologies and particularly in wind power exploitation. The research focuses on three
chief is-sues: the optimal reactive power provision that ts the needs of system operators, the
denition of a possible remuneration scheme for reactive power providers, and the impact of wind
power on voltage control and reactive power support. The main tool used in the analysis is an
Optimal Reactive Power Flow (ORPF) program, designed for hierarchical voltage regulation
structures, such as that developed for the Italian EHV system by its past monopolistic utility. Some
nodal indicators are calculated allowing both economic and security aspects to be investigated. On
one hand, they provide the economic value of VAR sources at a certain bus in the system, so
suggesting a suitable nancial compensation scheme for reactive power service and the
implementation of a zonal reactive market based on the Secondary Voltage Regulation (SVR) areas;
on the other hand, they identify the network locations (nodes or areas) that are poor in terms of
reactive sources, so giving the transmission planner useful indications about the additional measure
to be taken to control the voltages. The technical requirements for grid connection of wind farms and
especially their possible utilization under primary and secondary voltage regulation are examined to
assess the impact of wind generation on voltage control and the benets resulting from wind farms'
par-ticipation in reactive power support. Finally, the eects of the planned network reinforcements are
investigated.
In view of the above discussions, the main objective of this research work is therefore to present
suitable approaches for achieving more coordination between generation expansion and transmis-
sion development, on one hand, and for ensuring a secure and e-cient reactive power provision and
for favouring the integration of wind farms in power systems, on the other hand, in the context of the
new planning and operating paradigms of deregulated electricity industry.
1.3 Thesis outline

This thesis is organized in two main parts which refer to the two topics considered in
the research work.
Chapter 2 deals with the methodology based on the Weighted Transmission Loading Relief sensi-
tivities and its application to power system planning. After investigating the relationship between
generation expansion and transmission planning in a liberalised environment and their respective
eects on both electricity market e-ciency and power system security (Sections 2.1 and 2.2), the WTLR-
based methodology is described, and the MATLAB procedure implemented for the cal-culation and
graphical representation of WTLRs is presented in Section 2.3. First, it is applied to the CIGRE 63-bus
test system in order to check the outcomes' correctness and then to de-
ne a possible metric for prioritizing transmission planning (Section 2.4). Some changes made in
the original MATLAB procedure, including the introduction of Line Outage Distribution Factors
(LODFs) and the adoption of the distributed slack bus, are described, and their impact on the
procedure results are analysed in Section 2.5. Finally, in Section 2.6 the methodology is used
to carry out some analyses on the Italian EHV electric system at dierent projection horizons,
with the aim of demonstrating the potential applications of the WTLR tool for power system
planning. In particular, as regards the producers' viewpoint, some simulations are performed
considering a possible set of new generation sites in order to dene a priority list. Instead, as
regards trans-mission planning, the tests on the Italian system presented in the chapter show
that the WTLR procedure can be used to identify the weakest grid areas and elements, to
demonstrate the develop-ment plan benets, to assess the impact of an increasing wind
penetration on network security, to rank a set of planned transmission reiforcements, and to
propose new grid reinforcements. Finally, the interchangeability of generation and transmission
investments, in terms of system security enhancement, is demonstrated.
Chapter 3 looks at the reactive power support and voltage control ancillary service in the restruc-
tured and liberalised environment. First, it briey introduces the concept of ancillary services and
proposes a summary of their denition in dierent markets, including the Italian one (Section 3.1).
Then it reviews the essential and basic principles of reactive power support and voltage control,
giving an interesting overview of the main general issues, both technical and regulatory, related to
the procurement and management of these services, and showing the various challenges with
which the System Operator and the Regulatory Authority have to deal, especially concerning the
provision mechanism and the remuneration scheme (Sections 3.2 and 3.3). Section 3.4 presents a
detailed review of the reactive power management topic, briey describing the approach to reac-tive
power provision in dierent deregulated markets in North America and Europe, and making a
summary of the literature on reactive power pricing and management. In Section 3.5 the ar-
chitecture of the voltage control system is considered with particular regard to its organization into
three-level hierarchy, which is the voltage regulation structure set up for the Italian electric system
by its past monopolistic utility (ENEL). In particular, the basic principles of Secondary and Tertiary
Voltage Control are described. Section 3.6 deals with the reactive power service in Italy, providing
an outline of the current regulatory framework and of the main characteristics of its network voltage
control system. The Optimal Reactive Power Flow program (ORPF), that has a fundamental role in
hierarchical voltage control scheme since it computes the optimal voltage proles and reactive levels,
is presented in detail, and how to derive an economic value of reactive power from its solution is
delineated (Section 3.7). Section 3.8 investigates the impact of wind power on voltage control and
reactive power procurement, and a summary of some regulatory requirements with regard to
reactive power control in steady-state conditions for wind plants and of some existing technology
solutions is provided. The results of the tests on the Italian EHV system are presented in Section
3.9. Firstly, the generation proles at the fteen wind collection substations, connected to the 380 kV
network, considered in the analysis, are dened by means of an Optimal Power Flow program. Then
the control areas, pilot nodes, and controlling gener-ators are selected according to some specic
criteria. The test cases are dened considering the following aspects: what kind of generators
operates under voltage control (synchronous generators and/or wind farms), planned transmission
reinforcements in service or not in service, presence of the large-size wind farms connected to the
380 kV network.
Finally, the main characteristics of the CIGRE 63-bus network will be described in Appendix A.
Appendix B will treat the theory of Power Distribution Factors, which has been the basis for
deriv-ing the approximate Injection Shift Distribution Factors (ISDFs), in normal and post-
contingency conditions, and the Line Outage Distribution Factors (LODFs), both implemented
in the MAT-LAB program for WTLR calculation. In Appendix C the issue of slack bus modelling
in load ow solutions will be discussed, with particular regard to the basic concepts of the
distributed slack bus model and its dierences with respect to the traditional power ow
formulation. Appendix D and Appendix E will analyse two aspects of reactive power supply and
voltage control thoroughly: they will describe the devices capable of providing reactive power
support and the main technical features of the Italian hierarchical voltage control system.
Chapter 2
WTLR and power system planning
The evolution of the electricity industry from the past vertically integrated utilities to the nowadays
deregulated and unbundled structures has introduced deep changes in the planning and operation
of electric energy systems. In this new environment the coordination between transmission planning
and generation expansion is no longer assured as it used to be in vertically integrated structures,
where both transmission network and generation power plants belonged to the same utility com-
pany. Traditionally the integrated planning of generation and transmission systems was in fact the
responsibility of vertically integrated utilities under state regulatory oversights. In today's increasingly
competitive electricity markets, self-interested players and competitors participate in the planning
and operation of power systems. Generation companies (GENCOs), as independent and for-prot
market entities, are freely and actively making plans for generation expansion, which could
dramatically impact existing transmission ows and congestions. Customers can also select their
own electric energy suppliers based on economics, power quality, and security. Instead, the
transmission system continues to be regarded as a regulated monopoly. As a consequence, the
transmission system planning is facing credible challenges for managing its operation economics
and security. So the conict between these two aspects is inevitable in the restructured electricity
industry planning.
In the VIU (Vertically Integrated Utility) arrangement, the aim of the integrated planning of
generation and transmission systems was to minimize both investment and operation costs,
while supplying demand for energy over a time horizon, keeping the quality and reliability
standards of the network. In the competitive electricity market, as demand grows and new
power plants are installed, increasing transmission capacity is likely to be necessary also to
improve market competition and mitigate the possible exercise of locational market power. In
particular, the Transmission System Operator (TSO) has to dene strong and exible
transmission expansion plans to face the numerous uncertainties which can characterize the
planning process. The analysis of present and forecast scenarios of the electric system allows
the TSO to determine where, when, and what kind of network reinforcements need to be built
in order to avoid both security and economic ine-ciencies in the future.
One of the main uncertainties that the Transmission System Operator has to consider in transmis-
sion planning, to ensure a secure, reliable, and uninterrupted electricity supply, is the generation
system development (i. e. size and location of new power plants). In competitive electricity mar-kets
GENCOs' objective for generation resource planning is to maximize expected payos over planning
horizons. Such generation system development, which is not necessarily correlated to the
9
CHAPTER 2. WTLR AND POWER SYSTEM PLANNING 10
network planning, could also reduce the electricity market e-ciency: it could lead to a bad
location of the cheapest power plants, whose generation would be substituted by that of
more expensive units, because of the occurrence of network congestions. Moreover, it
could reduce the expected eectiveness of a grid reinforcement planned by the TSO.
Therefore, a better exploitation of both existing and planned network facilities would
be attained if there were a more coherent development of generation and transmission
systems. More coordi-nation would be justied by the strong interrelationship between
these two systems. The planning decisions taken by power producers can in fact
inuence the development plan of the transmission system, and vice versa.
Finally, besides being interdependent, generation investments and transmission expansion
may be equivalent in terms of both improving electricity market e-ciency and enhancing power
system security, that is, generation and transmission may be interchangeable.
The chapter will investigate these issues, and then it will describe a methodology, based
on a nodal index called Weighted Transmission Loading Relief (WTLR), capable of
assessing the impact of generation on network security. A MATLAB program for the
calculation of this indicator and its application to a test system (CIGRE 63-bus system) will
be presented. Finally, some simulations on the Italian EHV electrical system will be shown
in order to demonstrate the tool usefulness for generation and transmission planning and
especially for attaining a more coherent development of the whole power system.
2.1 Power system planning and electricity market e-ciency

2.1.1 Electricity market e-ciency
According to an economic denition, the Social Economic Welfare is the dierence between a
product's value to the consumer and its cost of production. It is also the sum of producer prot
and consumer surplus in a free market economy. The producer surplus is the amount that
producers benet by selling at a market price mechanism that is higher than they would be
willing to sell for. Instead, the consumer surplus is the amount that consumers benet by being
able to purchase a product for a price that is less than they would be willing to pay [1].
On a standard supply and demand (S&D) diagram, consumer surplus is the triangular
area above the price level and below the demand curve, since intramarginal
consumers are paying less for the item than the maximum that they would pay. On the
contrary, producer surplus is the triangular area below the price level and above the
supply curve, since that is the minimum quantity a producer can produce (Figure 2.1).
Economic e-ciency is a general term in economics describing how well a system is performing,
in generating the maximum desired output for given inputs with available technology.
A system can be called economically e-cient if:

no one can be made better o without making someone else worse o;

more output cannot be obtained without increasing the amount of inputs;

production proceeds at the lowest possible per unit cost.
Productive e-ciency occurs when production of one good is achieved at the lowest possible cost, given
the production of the other good(s). Equivalently, it is when the highest possible output
Figure 2.1: Graph illustrating consumer and producer surpluses
of one good is produced, given the production level of the other good(s). In other
words, it is the optimum organization of production: rms produce the demanded
quantity of goods or services (electric energy in our case) at the minimum cost,
considering the current best-practice technological and managerial processes.
Allocative e-ciency occurs when consumers get the maximum quantity of goods or
services (elec-tric energy in our case), given the current production costs. In other
words, it is the optimum management of commercial exchanges.
Necessary and su-cient condition for the Social Welfare maximization is that productive and
allocative e-ciencies are jointly fullled. This condition is represented by Figure 2.1, in which
both produced and consumed quantities are the highest possible at the lowest possible cost.
The other market conditions that can occur are the following:

Productive e-ciency + Allocative ine-ciency (Figure 2.2)
Production costs are the lowest possible, but the market quantity is not the highest
possible, because of ine-ciencies in electric energy exchanges. By causing a dierence
between the price received by producers and that paid by consumers, the Transmission
System Operator secures the area labeled Congestion Revenue, which comes at the
expense of the consumer surplus and producer surplus that would have existed in case
of allocative e-ciency. The gone triangle of Deadweight Loss (DWL) goes to no one
because those transactions are prevented by transmission limits.

Productive ine-ciency + Allocative e-ciency (Figure 2.3)
Both produced and consumed quantities are the highest possible, given the
current production costs. But the given output could be produced at a lower cost.

Productive ine-ciency + Allocative ine-ciency (Figure 2.4)
Figure 2.2: Productive e-ciency + Allocative
ine-ciency
Figure 2.3: Productive ine-ciency + Allocative e-ciency

Figure 2.4: Productive ine-ciency + Allocative ine-ciency
The market quantity is not the highest possible and also the production costs are
not the lowest possible.
2.1.2 Generation system investments and Social Welfare

From the viewpoint of Social Welfare, the most relevant investments are those in xed
assets, which include machinery, buildings and land, and in technology [2].
For our purposes, it is enough to consider only two types of investments in power generation system:

capacity expansion;

cost reducing.
Capacity expansion investments enable a rm to expand the amount of its production

volume that is produced at minimum unit costs. There are two types of rms which
undertake these investments:

a rm already in the sector (left side of Figure 2.5);

a new rm, if the market system is competitive.
The eects of generating capacity investments are:

if the investment is made by a new rm and the market system is non-competing,
the market will become more competitive and the market power will decrease;

the competitive oer is expanded for the same price (right side of Figure 2.5);
the investment can allow capacity/reliability constraints to be fullled: for instance, in the face of demand uncertainty in the
short-run, it allows a reserve capacity to be available.
Figure 2.5: Eects of a capacity expansion investment
Figure 2.6: Eects of a cost reducing investment
Cost reducing investments consist in adopting new equipments to modernize the

production cycle or in replacement and extraordinary maintenance of existing facilities:
from the viewpoint of a rm, these investments have the main purpose of reducing the
unit costs, as shown by the left side of Figure 2.6. The consequences on the sector
supply are instead represented on the right side of Figure 2.6.
In conclusion, the eects of technological investments on Social Welfare are (Figure 2.7):

Cost minimization: both expansion capacity and cost reducing investments allow the produc-
tive e-ciency to be improved because the total costs are reduced, tending more and more to
the long-run costs. More precisely, the sector supply will tend to the long-run supply curve,
when the most e-cient rms have been imitated (by new ones or competitors), while the least
e-cient ones have changed their production and cost structure.
Market power mitigation: if a new rm enters the market, there will be more competition and the allocative
ine-ciency will be reduced.
Figure 2.7: Technological investments and market e-ciency
2.1.3 Transmission system expansion and Social Welfare

Transmission system investments consist in developing new network assets and in
upgrading the existing ones. Their main objectives are:

to develop the interconnections among national areas to reduce grid bottlenecks
and network congestions;

to increase the transmission capacity of the interconnection corridor between two
neighbour-ing countries;

to connect new power plants or new loads to the electricity network.
In competitive electricity markets, an increase in transmission capacity can have two

dierent eects on Social Welfare, named [3]:

substitution eect, which was the only economic eect of the transmission
expansion in vertically integrated structures;

strategic or competition eect.
On one hand, the transmission expansion can cause the substitution (in production) of
some expensive power plants, originally dispatched because of binding network
constraints, by cheaper ones, so reducing the total generation costs and improving the
productive e-ciency (substitution eect).
On the other hand, an increase in transmission capacity can allow market participants to sell/buy
power demanded/produced far away, which encourages competition among rms, so mitigating the
possible exercise of market power and improving the allocative e-ciency (strategic eect).
2.1.4 General considerations

According to the preceding subsections, in competitive electricity markets an increase
in transmis-sion capacity may have the same eect of a generation system investment
on Social Welfare and market e-ciency.
The substitution eect can allow low-cost power to be produced in greater quantities so improving the
productive e-ciency. In this case, an increase in transmission capacity is equivalent to a generation
investment aimed at expanding the total production capacity (generation expansion investment) or
at reducing the total generation costs (cost reducing investment).
The strategic eect can encourage competition among producers and improve the
allocative e--ciency. In this case, an increase in transmission capacity has the same
eect of the entry of new rms into the market.
Therefore, these brief remarks highlight that generation investments and network expansion
may be equivalent in terms of electricity market e-ciency and Social Welfare improvement.
The next section will also demonstrate that system security may benet from an
appropriate choice of new power plants' sites, besides from transmission planning.
2.2 Power system planning and network security

The bulk power system is made up of three main parts: generation, transmission, and load (i. e.
customer electric demand). The electric industry uses terms such as reliable, unreliable or system
reliability as qualitative measures of the relative strength or balance of the bulk electric system.
Reliability is the term used by the electric industry to describe and measure the performance of the
bulk power system. It is the degree to which the performance of the elements of that system results
in power being delivered to consumers within accepted standards and in the amount desired. The
degree of reliability may be quantitatively measured by the range of operating conditions under
which the system performs within acceptable parameters.
For instance, NERC (North American Electric Reliability Corporation) denes the reliability
of the interconnected bulk power system in terms of two basic and functional aspects [4]:

Adequacy: the ability of the bulk power system to supply the aggregate electrical
demand and energy requirements of the customers at all times, taking into account
scheduled and reasonably expected unscheduled outages of system elements.

Security (or operating reliability): the ability of the bulk power system to withstand
sudden disturbances such as electric short circuits or unanticipated loss of
system elements from credible contingencies.
In plain language, adequacy implies that su-cient generation and transmission resources
are avail-able to meet projected needs plus reserves for contingencies. Instead, security
implies that the power system will remain intact even after outages or equipment failures.
From the static viewpoint, network security can be summarized to include the following
conditions: no loss of load, bus voltages within power quality bounds, line ows not exceeding
thermal limits, and the system operating away from the point of static voltage collapse.
2.2.1 Measuring system security
The transmission system security for a given scenario can be assessed by means of contingency
analysis simulations. Contingency analysis [5] denes a set of plausible contingencies that represent
events such as failure or disconnection of network devices. A contingency list contains each of the
elements that will be removed from the network model, one by one, to test the e ects for possible
overloads of the remaining grid elements. In its basic form, contingency analysis executes a power
ow calculation for each potential problem that is dened by the contingency list: the failure or
outage of each element in the contingency list (e. g. a loss of a transmission line) is simulated
in the network model by removing that element. The resulting network model is solved to
calculate the new power ows, voltages, and currents for the remaining elements of the model.
The outcomes can be tabulated in order to detect the contingencies that may lead to
severe or critical operating conditions, and to decide remedial actions, such as re-dispatch
or load shedding. They can be also used to determine the transmission lines or
transformers that present severe violations for one or multiple outages, and to rank grid
branches according to their relative weak-ness. So this analysis supplies some useful
information not only about the need to upgrade the transmission system, but also about
the way of designing its expansion to avoid thermal overloads under specic conditions.
There are several metrics that can be adopted to rank weak grid elements: for
example, the number of contingencies that cause overloads in a specic branch or its
maximum percentage overload. Nevertheless, the former does not consider the
overload severity, while the latter does not take into account the number of overloads.
An indicator that captures both the contingency severity and the presence of multiple
violations can be derived as follows [6]. Let:
P
CO% be the branch percentage overload that appears in a line when a contingency occurs;

P
ACO% be the sum of all overloads in a particular branch.

In other words, the aggregate contingency overload for a given line (or transformer) jk
is calculated as:
X
c
PACO%;jk = PCO %;jk c 2 Contingency List (2.1)
c
This quantity is expressed in percentage and it is not able to discriminate among voltage
levels: for instance, a 10% overload in a low voltage element would have the same rank as
a 10% overload in a higher voltage element. So it is useful to convert it to MW:
P =P M V A rating (2.2)
ACO;jk ACO%;jk jk
The previous expression is based on the approximation that the line MVA rating is a
MW limit. This is commonly done in linear methods and in the DC power ow.
The P
ACO expressed in MW is a better index compared to the percentage quantity
because it retains information about the line MVA ow, e. g. a 20% overload in a 132 kV
line should have lower severity than a 20% overload in a 400 kV line.
The P
ACO index has the following properties that make it useful for assessing the weakness of a
branch:

if a branch is not overloaded for any contingencies (belonging to the contingency
its P
list), then ACO will be equal to zero;

if a branch is either heavily overloaded for a few contingencies or lightly overloaded for lots of
contingencies, its PACO will be high;

if a branch is heavily overloaded for numerous contingencies, its PACO will be very high;
the higher the PACO, the weaker the branch.

One measure of system security is the amount of thermal overloading that occurs during a
set of simulated contingencies or forced outages. The level of contingent overloading may
be expressed as the sum of MW overloads in all monitored transmission elements and for
cies. Since the P
all simulated contingen- ACO can be computed for every branch, a system
aggregate contingency overload can be calculated as:

X jk 2 Overloaded branches
P (2.3)
OverloadSY S = ACO;jk
jk
For a given line jk and a given contingency c the contribution to the OverloadSY S would
be the amount of MW that the real power ow on line jk exceeds its rating, when the
contingency c occurs. If the line operates within its limits for all contingencies, then its
Overload
contribution to the SY S will be equal to zero.
Although the Overload
SY S provides a metric of the security of the overall grid, it will tend to
be higher not only for highly stressed systems but also for large systems. In order to make
the metric independent of the network size, it can be divided by the number of branches
Nbranches, resulting in the Thermal Security Index (TSI) of the system:
OverloadSY S
T SISY S =
Nbranches (2.4)
Given a contingency set, this metric represents the average MW overload expected in
a line in case of contingency.
2.2.2 Generation expansion and power system security

The continuing growth in demand for electric power, decreased investment in transmission
facilities, and widespread implementation of electricity markets will continue to place
increased stress on the electric transmission network. So, as previously said, there is an
increasing need for systematic, integrated planning processes that, while ensuring energy
adequacy, are able to identify the broader impact of new resources on grid security. These
processes would permit utilities to strategically site power plants based on system security
goals, allowing the grid to move toward healthier operating conditions. The following
paragraph will describe a methodology able to capture how generation impacts system
reliability and security, based on a nodal index proposed in literature few years ago [6].
2.2.2.1 Overload mitigation strategy
The proposed methodology is based on the overload mitigation strategy illustrated in Figure
2.8, which shows an overloaded line and an injection that helps to mitigate the overload by
means of a counter-ow. So the goal of strategic generation siting is to determine geographic
locations where new generation would enhance the system security by creating post-
contingency counter-ows that would mitigate overloads under contingency conditions.
As injections at any place in the system will at least marginally aect the ows everywhere in the
system, the aim is to look for a mechanism to simultaneously maximize the contingency
overload mitigation in multiple congested elements and minimize new overloads in the system.
Since the new generation will be connected to a bus, it is necessary to relate information regarding
weak elements (the problem) to bus injections (the solution). This can be accomplished by calcu-
Figure 2.8: Overload mitigation strategy using generation
lating the Injection Shift Distribution Factors 1 (ISDFs). This sensitivity is dened as the
change in a branch MW ow with respect to the change in a bus MW injection,
assuming a xed sink for a transfer whose source is the proposed generation:
bus i M W F low (2.5)
branch jk
ISDF =
branch jk
M W Injectionbus i
Denoting by n the number of buses in the system, it is clear that for each weak element an n-size
array of sensitivities can be determined. So the ISDFs with respect to multiple weak
elements form a matrix in the bus and weak element dimensions. The highest
negative ISDF in this array corresponds to the bus where a power injection results in
the highest reduction of the normal operation ow on that element.
Electricity system policy though does not dene security based on normal operation ows,
but rather on contingency conditions (i. e. following the outage of a given line st). Thus
post-contingency ISDFs are required:
bus i
P ostContM W F lowbranch jk;cont c (2.6)
ISDF =
branch jk;contingency c
M W Injectionbus i
Note that when contingency conditions are studied, there will be one ISDF for each source bus,
to mitigate each weak branch, under each contingency. The post-contingency sensitivities form
a large three-dimensional object in the bus, weak branch, and contingency dimensions, and
they can be used to design strategies to mitigate contingency overloads.
Since a single locational value is needed for each bus, both the contingency and weak
branch dimensions need to be collapsed to the bus dimension. As a power injection will
simultaneously aect several branches under several contingency conditions, it is possible
to dene an Equivalent Transmission Loading Relief (ETLR) sensitivity, which corresponds
to the impact of injecting power at a given bus on all branches and under all contingency
conditions. The ETLR is simply the sum of the ISDFs computed for a bus:
XX
ISDF (2.7)
ET LRbus i = bus i;branch jk;cont c
jk c
1
In [6] this sensitivity is called TLR (Transmission Loading
Relief).
where jk 2 Overloaded branches and c 2 Contingency List.
Although the ETLR represents the simultaneous eect of injection, it does not take into
account the severity of the overloads, something that is fundamental for strategic
overload mitigation. In order to consider this important aspect, a weighting mechanism
is introduced. So the severity of the overloads can be incorporated by computing a
WTLR (Weighted Transmission Loading Relief) sensitivity:
N @ X XX A
viol
i i st
0 1
(2.8)
W T LRi = OverloadSY S ISDFjk PCO;jk + ISDFjk (st)PCO;jk

jk jk st
where:
N
viol is the number of overloads;

Overload
SY S is the system overload;

P ,P st jk in intact system conditions and following the

CO;jk are the overloads on branch
CO;jk
outage of the line st respectively;
ISDF i ISDF i jk with respect
jk , jk (st) are
the Injection Shift Distribution Factors of branch to the
injection at bus i in intact system conditions and following the outage of the line st
respectively.
The WTLR represents the locational impact of generation on network security: it

corresponds to the total expected MW contingency overload reduction (in all branches and
under all contingencies) if 1 MW is injected at that particular bus. More precisely, the WTLR
of a bus is an indicator which approximates the total change in the system overload (
OverloadSY S) that would be obtained with a 1 MW injection at that particular bus.

The WTLR sensitivity represents the locational value of the security benet obtained with
new generation and it is measured in OverloadSY S per megawatt installed.
Thus the approach allows comparing the reduction of the overall system overload for
generation located at dierent WTLR locations and it allows ranking the sites where
new generation injections would enhance system security.
Note that the highest negative WTLRs are located at the receiving end of the overloaded
elements. Clearly, injections at these buses will produce counter-ows in the overloaded
reduce their P
elements, which will ACO. On the other hand, injections at buses with positive
WTLR will produce power ows that would worsen the overloads. So if overload mitigation is the
goal, then new generation should be installed at buses that have the lowest WTLR.
2.2.3 Transmission planning and power system security

Maintaining power system security is one of the major challenges that TSOs (Transmission System
Operators) have to face today. In fast moving and de-regulated electricity markets, transmission
companies across the globe often have a dual and conicting responsibility for maintaining system
security and for achieving high transmission performance levels. So the objective in market-based
transmission planning is to maintain system security within an acceptable level while maximizing the
social welfare (or minimizing the investment and operation costs).
According to the Ministerial Decree D.M. April 4, 2005 [7], the Italian TSO has to de ne
the development plan of the transmission network to achieve the following objectives:

to ensure the security of electricity supply and to meet the demand growth;

to upgrade the interconnection capacity with neighbouring countries;

to meet the grid connection requests by the entitled parties;

to minimize the risk of network congestions;

to guarantee a secure operation of the network.
According to the Italian grid code [8], the planning process starts from collecting,
sorting, and analysing the data about:

load prediction;

new power plants' size and location;

national power balance and electric power exchanges with foreign countries.
With reference to the projection horizon, some probable scenarios are dened and on the basis of
them some reference cases are built and analysed to detect possible critical operational situations
and above all to determine the network reinforcements necessary for their enhancement. Then the
TSO carries out a steady-state security analysis applying the N-1 criterion, 2 to set up the initial
development programme of the transmission network, while meeting the following conditions:

with reference to some typical operational situations, considering the predictable generation
schedules, the power supply must be guaranteed without any violation of security constraints
(limitations on currents in lines and transformers and on voltage magnitudes in grid nodes)
in normal state, i. e. in intact system conditions;

the outage of single network equipment must not result in thermal overloading of
branches, deterioration of voltage proles below permitted range, loss of load.
Obviously, besides the need to maintain power system security, the TSO also checks the
dierent development options from a techno-economical viewpoint by comparing the
estimated construction costs with the expected benets in terms of reducing the overall
system cost. If that is possible, such assessment considers the costs due to: network
congestions, grid losses, risk of loss of load, predictable tendency of the electricity market,
opportunity to increase the transmission capacity with neighbouring countries.
2.2.3.1 WTLR and transmission planning
The Weighted Transmission Loading Relief sensitivity is based on the overload

mitigation strategy illustrated in Figure 2.8, which exploits the potential eect of
strategic generation siting on system security. Even if this is its original application, the
approach can be a useful tool for transmission planning.
A desirable goal of any network upgrade or reinforcement would be to improve the system security
as measured by Overload
SY S. As well explained before, negative WTLR values correspond to sites where
injections will tend to enhance grid security by reducing OverloadSY S, while locations with positive WTLRs
are poor for network security, since they will worsen the contingency overloads.
2
The N-1 criterion essentially says that an outage of any grid element shall not result in the
overloading and subsequent failure of other elements in the system.
Figure 2.9: Transmission relief
In particular, considerable changes from positive to negative values reveal the

presence of congested grid elements: the region with negative WTLRs is at the
receiving end of an overloaded branch, whereas locations with positive WTLRs are at
the sending end. So information supplied by these sensitivities can be successfully
used to identify the most critical grid elements and sections, that are to be reinforced.
Besides these fundamental indications, the bus WTLR value can be also applied to
each end of a proposed transmission line to linearly estimate the total expected
OverloadSY S change consequent on the addition of a new branch. To enhance
system security, new lines should be added to produce counter-ows on the lines and
transformers that experience contingency overloads as illustrated in Figure 2.9.
Assume that the power ow expected from bus j toward bus k is Pjk. If the system is supposed to be
loss-less and linear within a range dened by the incremental ow on the proposed line, then adding
the proposed line will be equivalent to place a generator at bus j with an output of Pjk and a generator
at bus k with an output of +Pjk, as illustrated in Figure 2.10.
The bus-based WTLR values may then be applied to estimate the impact of a new
transmission line on system security by calculating the following index:
Pjk ( W T LRj + W T LRk) (2.9)
The expected Pjk can be evaluated by adding the line jk to the system and quantifying Pjk
with a full non-linear power ow calculation.
The simulations on a test system, which will be presented after the description of the procedure for
WTLR calculation coded in the Matlab programming language, will be also used to validate the above
index and particularly to show that, given a set of new transmission lines, it can supply helpful
information to prioritize grid planning.
Figure 2.10: Network equivalents
2.3 Matlab-coded program for WTLR sensitivity calculation

A procedure has been implemented in the Matlab programming language [9] to calculate WTLR
sensitivities and above all to obtain their graphical representation, that shows the grid areas ade-
quate to the installation of new power plants and those requiring network reinforcements.
The computational procedure operates in the following main steps:
1. N and N-1 security assessment to nd possible branch overloads and consequently

the total system overload OverloadSY S;
2. calculation of the Injection Shift Distribution Factors in both pre-contingency

and post-contingency conditions;
3. calculation of Weighted Transmission Loading Relief sensitivities by equation (2.8);
4. graphical representation of WTLR factors.
The original procedure is based on these main assumptions:

the security assessment is performed by means of AC power ow calculations
according to a traditional contingency analysis;

the overloads are determined assuming the approximation that the line MVA
rating is a MW limit;

the ISDFs are calculated considering a single slack bus, i. e. concentrated slack bus.
2.3.1 Step 1: security analysis

As above said, N and N-1 security assessment is performed by means of a sequence of AC
load ow calculations. According to a standard contingency analysis, the procedure executes a
power ow calculation in intact system conditions and for each outage included in the
contingency list: the failure or outage of each element in the contingency list (in our case, the
trip of a transmission line) is simulated in the network model by removing that element.
The procedure calls one of the power ow solvers that are included in MATPOWER package [10]
and can be accessed via the runpf function, so performing a load ow calculation in N security
conditions. More precisely, the procedure exploits the default power ow solver, which is
based on a standard Newton's method using a full Jacobian, updated at each iteration. 3
To carry out the security assessment considering the N-1 criterion and so to simulate a transmission
line outage, it has been necessary to make suitable changes in the original runpf function. The
procedure is also able to simulate the system operation following the outage of a line
with two parallel circuits carried by the same pylon (the so called N-1.5 security
criterion). In these cases it is possible to consider higher power ow limits: for instance,
the user can choose to put 20% on all line thermal limits.
After each load ow, the branch overloads (MW) are calculated as:
Overloadjk = P owerf lowjk Limitjk (2.10)
where:
p
Limit = M V A rating = 3V I
jk jk n n in intact system conditions;
p
Limitjk = k M V A ratingjk = k 3 VnIn in N-1 security conditions (with k 1, default: k = 1:2,
which puts 20% on all line thermal limits).
The contingency analysis results are organized by contingency and then saved in a le: as
shown in Figure 2.11, each row lists the contingency that caused at least one overload,
together with the overloaded branch, the violating ow and percentage, the overload in MW.
The overloaded branches are also organized according to their criticality measured by their
total overload, i. e. the sum of all overloads on that particular branch. This ranking, which is
useful to identify the weakest grid elements, is then saved in a le: as illustrated in Figure 2.12,
each row lists the overloaded branch, the number of violations, and the total overload.
2.3.2 Step 2: ISDF calculation

The second main step of the procedure is the calculation of Injection Shift Distribution
Factors, rst in intact system conditions and then considering those transmission line
outages that caused at least one overload.
The following paragraphs have the aim of explaining how to derive the Injection Shift Distribution
Factors in both N and N-1 security conditions, considering a single slack bus [11, 12].
For the sake of simplicity, the DC approximation of the distribution factors has been
adopted in the procedure for the calculation of WTLR sensitivities.
2.3.2.1 Distribution factor formulation
The basis for the distribution factor formulation begins by considering linear circuits
with voltage and current sources interconnected by impedances [11, 15].
Consider an n-bus plus ground network modeled with the admittance matrix referenced to ground.
For a given schedule of constant power bus loads and slack bus 1, a base case A solution satises:
3
The ENFORCE_Q_LIMS option is set to 1 (default is 0): then, if any generator reactive power limit is violated
after running the AC power ow, the corresponding bus is converted to a PQ bus, with the reactive output set to the limit,
and the case is re-run. The voltage magnitude at the bus will deviate from the specied value in order to satisfy the
reactive power limit.
If the generator at the reference bus reaches a reactive power limit and the bus is converted to a PQ bus, the rst
remaining PV bus will be used as the slack bus for the next iteration. This may result in the real power output at this
generator being slightly o from the specied values.
Figure 2.11: Example of le with contingency analysis results
Figure 2.12: Example of le with overloaded branches' ranking
2 I1 3 = 2Y ::: Y 3 2V A 3 (2.11)
.. ..11 1..n
1 ..
6 .A 7 6 . . 76 7
I A Yn 1 : : : Ynn V .A
6 n 7 6 76 n 7
4 5 4 54 5
with each bus injection current I A

i coming from the ground through a path not
[Y ].
included in The [Y ] matrix may include any line, transformer, load admittance
connected between any two buses or between a bus and ground. For a generator, this
injection current is the generator current. For a load (not included in [Y ]), this injection
current is the negative of the load current. All quantities are in per unit. For this
analysis, let slack bus 1 be an ideal voltage source with voltage xed as:
V =V 0
1 1 (2.12)
Eliminating the slack bus current from the network model gives:
2I 3 = 2 Y..22
2..
::: Y 32V A 3 + 2Y 3 V0 (2.13)
6 A 7 6 .2 2..n 2..
.. 21
I .A Yn
6 n 7 6 ::: .
Y nn 76 V .A 7 6 .
Yn 1 7 1
4 5 4
76 n 7 6 7
54 5 4 5
Solving for the case A voltages gives:
2V A 3 = 2Z ::: Z 32I Y 21V1

0 3 (2.14)
2 .. A
.. 22 .. 2n 2 ..
6 V .A 7 6 . ::: . 7 6 IA . 7
Z n2 Znn Y n1V 0
6 n 7 6 76 n 1 7
4 5 4 54 5
The line currents for case A are:
VAV A jk
IA = j k
(2.15)
zjk
where zjk is the primitive line jk impedance.
Now consider changes in injection currents from case A to The case B network equations
case B. (for unchanged impedances) are:
2V B 3 = 2Z ::: Z 3 2 I2 B Y21V 0 3 (2.16)
2 .. ..22 ..2n .. 1
6 V .B 7 6 . ::: . 76 . 7
Z n2 Znn IB Y n1V 0
6 n 7 6 76 n 1 7
4 5 4 54 5
The line currents for case B are:
B (2.17)
I B B
= Vj Vk
jk
z
jk
From equations (2.14)-(2.17) the change in voltages and line jk current between cases B and A
are:
2 V 3 =2 Z ::: Z 32 I 3 (2.18)
.. 2 .. 22 .. 2n .. 2
. . . .
6 V n 7 6 Z n2 : : : Znn 76 In 7
6 7 6 76 7
4 5 4 54 5
jk n z
jk
I jk =I
B
I
A
jk =
i=2 Z Z
ji ki I
i (2.19)
where: Ii = IiB IiA. In cases where bus j or k equal 1, the entries of [Z] are dened to be
zero. This change can be written as:
Xi
n
Ijk = Tjk Ii
i (2.20)
=2
where
Tjk = Z Z
i (2.21)
ji ki
z
jk
is the so called Current Transfer Distribution Factor (CTDF).
When the slack bus is represented as a voltage source with loads and other generation
represented as current sources, the solutions given by equations (2.18) and (2.19) are exact.
The solution is instead approximate when constant power loads or additional voltage controlled
buses are present. In power ow studies, it is customary to convert these to power distribution
factors by considering loss-less conditions and assuming voltages to be near unity:
ISDF
i X X
= ji ki = b (X X ) (2.22)
jk
x jk jk ji ki
where xjk and bjk are the primitive line jk reactance and susceptance respectively.
Introducing the susceptance matrix [B] of DC load ow, the Injection Shift Distribution
Factor (ISDF) can be written as:
i (2.23)
ISDFjk = Bjk (Xji Xki)
So the change in line real power ow in response to real power injection changes can
be approxi-mated as follows:
n
Xi
Pjk ' ISDFjk Pi

i (2.24)
=2
Given a network with n buses and L branches, the complete ISDF-matrix can be obtained by the
following matrix calculation [13, 14], which is implemented in the Matlab-coded procedure:
= Bd A X (2.25)
where:
Bd 2 RL L is the diagonal matrix whose elements are the branch susceptances (branch
susceptance matrix);
L (n 1)
A2R is the branch to node incidence matrix whose row l (with 1 at column j and 1
h0 0 1 00 1 00 i
at column k) is (reduced incidence matrix);
is the reactance matrix, which is the inverse of the susceptance
X = B 1 2 R(n 1) (n 1)
one (reduced nodal reactance matrix).
It is clear that the sensitivity matrix is strictly dependent on the choice of the slack bus
(i. e. DC load ow reference bus) in the system.
2.3.2.2 Post-contingency distribution factor
For the calculation of the Injection Shift Distribution Factors in post-contingency conditions,
it is necessary to determine the inverse of the new susceptance matrix because of the grid
topological changes as a result of the line outage. To do this in a numerically cheap way,
we can apply the Woodbury Matrix Identity (also called the matrix inversion lemma), which
generally says that the inverse of a rank- k correction of a matrix can be computed by doing
a rank- k correction to the inverse of the original matrix [16].
In the special case where we have to calculate the inverse of a rank- 1 correction of a matrix (that is
the case of the calculation of the reactance matrix in post-contingency conditions), we can use
the so-called Sherman-Morrison formula [17], which computes the inverse of the sum of an
invertible matrix M and the dyadic product, u vT , of a column vector u and a row vector v:
1 1
MNEW = M + u (2.26)
1
=M M 1u vT M 1
vT
1
1 + vT M u
In our case, the new susceptance matrix BNEW following the line st outage is:
BNEW = B + u vT = B astbstastT (2.27)
h s t
01 0 i T (with 1 at column s and 1 at column t),
where ast = 0T
1T
u= a v =b a
st and st st.
The new reactance matrix X
NEW can be calculated by the following matrix calculation, which is
implemented in the Matlab-coded procedure:
1 1 1 T 1 1 T 1 (2.28)
XNEW = BNEW = B + B ast 1 ast bstB ast bstast B
Therefore, the generic element of XNEW is:

N (2.29)
Xjk = Xjk + (Xsj Xtj) (Xsk Xtk)
st
with
1 (Xss 2Xst + Xtt)
(2.30)
st = b
st
2.3.3 Step 3: WTLR calculation

The contingency analysis and the ISDF calculation provide all the data necessary for
the WTLR computation by using equation (2.8).
The procedure allows the user to select the set of grid buses that will be considered for the
calculation of both ISDFs and WTLRs. For instance, if the analysis regards the Italian transmission
system (380 and 220 kV), the user can choose among three dierent options: all 380 kV nodes, all
220 kV nodes, or the node set included in a le by the user, which will be read and loaded by the
procedure. The resulting WTLRs are then saved in a le, as shown in Figure 2.13.
Figure 2.13: Example of le with WTLR sensitivities
2.3.4 Step 4: WTLR graphical representation

The last step of the procedure is the graphical representation of WTLRs. A preliminary work is
indispensable: since each WTLR factor refers to a single node, which has its own location in the
grid, it is necessary to load an image le with the gure of the network considered in the analysis
(using the imread4 function), to display it in a gure window (using the image5 function), and
then to select the sequence of points [x; y] in the plane, corresponding to the chosen set of grid
nodes, with the ginput function, that enables the user to select points from the gure using the
mouse for cursor positioning and returns the coordinates of the pointer's position
(when a mouse button is pressed). To avoid repeating these operations whenever the
user is going to apply the procedure on a particular network, it is better to save the
selected coordinates in a MAT-le and to load them when necessary.
To obtain the WTLR graphical representation, rst the procedure has to associate each index
(included in a vector z) to the corresponding node, i. e. to its location in the grid and so to its
coordinates x; y in a two-dimensional Cartesian space.
Since the data are not conveniently spaced evenly on a grid, in fact x and y are unevenly spaced
vectors and are not vertices of a rectangular array, the procedure has to use the meshgrid6 function
to create an evenly spaced grid around the range of the data: this can be considered the X-Y
interpolation space. Using the original data and the X-Y interpolation space, the griddata7
4
A = imread(filename; fmt) reads a grayscale or colour image from the le specied by the string filename. If
the le is not in the current directory, or in a directory on the Matlab path, it is necessary to specify the full pathname. The
text string fmt species the format of the le by its standard le extension. The return value A is
an array containing the image data. The class of A depends on the bits-per-sample of the image data, rounded to the
next byte boundary.
5
The function image creates an image graphics object by interpreting each element in a matrix as an index into
the gure's colormap or directly as RGB values, depending on the data specied.
6[X; Y] = meshgrid(x; y) transforms the domain specied by vectors x and y into arrays X and Y , which can be
used to evaluate functions of two variables and three-dimensional mesh/surface plots. The rows of the output array X
are copies of the vector x, while the columns of the output array Y are copies of the vector y.
7
Z = griddata(x; y; z; X; Y; method) ts a surface of the form z = f(x; y) to the data in the (usually) nonuniformly spaced
vectors (x; y; z). It interpolates this surface at the points specied by (X; Y ) to produce Z. The surface always passes
through the data points. X and Y usually form a uniform grid (as produced by meshgrid). The method denes the specied
interpolation method and so the type of surface t to the data.
Figure 2.14: Example of contourf result for WTLR graphical representation
function calculates the interpolated Z data. Then, the contourf8 function provides a lled contour
plot that displays isolines calculated from matrix Z, i. e. from the interpolated WTLR values, and
lls the areas between the isolines using constant colours (an example is shown in Figure
2.14). To get the nal WTLR map as in Figure 2.15, the user has to superimpose the grid
image on that produced by the procedure by means of a suitable graphic software.
2.4 Application of the procedure to the CIGRE 63-bus sys-tem
The above described procedure is rst applied to the CIGRE 63-bus system [18].
The objective of the application to a small electric system is to demonstrate the eectiveness of
the proposed procedure to choose the adequate generation and transmission investments. The
results are also used to dene a metric to classify the transmission reinforcements according to
their positive impact on network security and electricity market e-ciency [19, 20].
The main features of the test system, illustrated in Figure 2.16 are summarized in Appendix A.
2.4.1 Simulation hypotheses

The main hypotheses for the simulations regard the contingency list for N-1 security
assessment and the thermoelectric generation prole.
8[C; h] = contourf(X; Y; Z; v) draws a contour plot of matrix Z with contour levels at the values specied in vector v, using X
and Y to determine the x- and y-axis limits. When X and Y are matrices, they must be the same size as Z, in which case
they specify a surface. X and Y must be monotonically increasing. The colour of the lled areas depends on the current
gure's colormap.
Figure 2.15: Example of WTLR graphical representation
Figure 2.16: CIGRE 63-bus test system
Table 2.1: Contingency list (CIGRE 63-bus system)
Table 2.2: Thermoelectric generation prole (CIGRE 63-bus system)
The set of contingencies includes the outages of every 220 and 150 kV line (Table 2.1); if a line
is made up by more than one circuit, the procedure will simulate the trip of one of them only. In
N-1 security conditions the real power limits are increased by 20%. In order to assess the
transmission system adequacy, the thermoelectric generation prole considered in the analysis
results from a dispatch procedure which does not take into account any network constraints
and so does not introduce any power adjustments (i. e. re-dispatching actions). In this way the
security assessment is able to identify the most critical operation conditions and the weakest
grid elements. Table 2.2 summarizes the thermoelectric generation prole.
2.4.2 Base case

Table 2.3 summarizes the security analysis outcomes for the base case described in the previous
paragraph. There are 37 transmission limit violations and the total system overload amounts to
Table 2.3: Contingency analysis results - Base case
1562.4 MW. The line 1M1-3M1 is the weakest grid element with 31 violations and a total
overload of 1226.6 MW; in particular, it is already overloaded in intact system conditions. This
is due to the real power ow from the low-cost generators at bus 11R3, owned by a self-
producer, to the load buses in area V, which has not enough generation capacity to meet its
local demand and whose generators at bus 92V3 are the most expensive in the system.
Table 2.4 shows the WTLR indices calculated for all grid buses (except for the slack bus 41M3). The
nodes with the smallest WTLR sensitivities, which are the most adequate to host new generating
capacity according to the index denition, are situated in areas V and T; instead, adding new power
plants in area R will result in the largest overload increase. Therefore, importing areas are the best
locations for new generating capacity because a power injection at negative-WTLR bus is able to
produce counter-ows which relieve overloads (for instance, on the line 1M1-3M1).
Figure 2.17 illustrates the WTLR graphical representation: a green or red area corresponds to
Table 2.4: WTLR sensitivities - Base case
the lowest or highest indices respectively. Changes from negative to positive values
(from green to yellow/red on the map) reveal the presence of congested elements (for
instance, the lines 1M1-3M1 and 75T2-775T2), so identifying the weakest grid
sections or areas where new transmission facilities should be realized.
2.4.3 WTLR-based generation expansion and network security

Considering the basic concept of the WTLR methodology (i. e. overload mitigation
strategy using generation), the most obvious use is strategic generation siting.
Among the set of negative-WTLR buses, three possible new generation sites are selected:

node 33V1 (base WTLR = -17.07);

node 5M1 (base WTLR = -10.89);

node 66M1 (base WTLR = -4.73).
The aim is to evaluate the benets for power system operation resulting from the new real
power injection at each of the above buses and thus to check the correctness of the
information provided by the WTLR values. The tests are carried out considering one site at
a time. For example, a new generator connected to the node 33V1 is added to the network
model, its size is increased by 50 MW at a time until the corresponding WTLR becomes
positive, and the total system overload is calculated in each case. The production cost of
the new unit is assumed low enough to allow it to be fully dispatched.
The variations of the index value at the new generation sites and of the system overload are
displayed in Figures 2.18-2.19 (bus 33V1), 2.20-2.21 (bus 5M1), and 2.22-2.23 (bus 66M1).
The dierences among the three cases are likely to be due to larger or shorter electrical
distance from the most critical grid element, i. e. the line 1M1-3M1.
The results make it evident that:

the installation of new generating capacity in a negative-WTLR bus allows the
total system overload to be reduced;

raising the installed capacity, the WTLR value increases while the system overload decreases;
Figure 2.17: WTLR graphical representation - Base case
Figure 2.18: Node 33V1 WTLR
Figure 2.19: System overload - New generator at node 33V1
Figure 2.20: Node 5M1 WTLR
Figure 2.21: System overload - New generator at node 5M1
Figure 2.22: Node 66M1 WTLR
Figure 2.23: System overload - New generator at node 66M1

at a certain value of the new generating capacity, the WTLR becomes positive
and corre-spondingly the total system overload starts to increase again;

the smaller the WTLR in the base case, the quicklier the total system overload
decreases by raising the new generating capacity;

on one hand, the nodes with the smallest WTLR can be considered the most adequate
sites for installing new units resulting in an eective system security enhancement, on the
other hand, these buses might be able to host a smaller generating capacity.
2.4.4 WTLR-based grid development

According to what said for the base case simulation and for the possible use of the
information supplied by the WTLR sensitivities, the realization of a new line connecting
the exporting areas R and F to the importing area V can produce a substantial
congestion alleviation, so resulting in global system security enhancement.
The most obvious choice is to double the connection between the nodes 1M1 and 3M1, since the
existing line is the most critical grid element, as shown by the contingency analysis results in Table
2.3. The other network reinforcements are selected according to the following criterion:
from bus ! negative-WTLR bus;
to bus ! positive-WTLR bus.

The new line will be an alternative path for power transmission from the exporting areas
(yellow-red colour/positive WTLR) to the importing ones (green colour/negative WTLR).
The set of nodes selected to dene the grid reinforcements includes:
from bus: 9V1, 5M1 (WTLR = -12.24, -10.89 respectively);

Figure 2.24: Network reinforcements for CIGRE 63-bus system

to bus: 1M1, 2M1, 8M1 (WTLR = +7.67, +3.63, +3.23 respectively).
So the set of network reinforcements considered in the study comprises the following
transmission lines: 1M1-3M1, 1M1-9V1, 1M1-5M1, 2M1-9V1, 2M1-5M1, 8M1-9V1, and
8M1-5M1 (Figure 2.24). To make the comparison easier, all new lines are assumed to
have the same features of the line 1M1-3M1.
2.4.4.1 WTLR procedure results
The realization of a new line is simulated in the network model by adding that element.
The procedure is then applied to the new grid model in order to calculate the new total
system overload and the new WTLR values.
The security assessment outcomes concerning all test cases are summarized in Table
2.5, which shows the change in the total system overload and in the number of
congestions consequent on the realization of each of the new transmission lines.
The simulations demonstrate the correctness of the information supplied by the WTLR
indices: adding a new line from a green-coloured area to a yellow/red-coloured one
can contribute to congestion alleviation. All the new lines considered in the analysis
have in fact a positive eect on system security.
As shown in Figure 2.25, the lines 1M1-5M1 and 2M1-5M1 are the most eective in terms of network
congestion alleviation. They both produce the same redistribution of power ows on grid branches
and so the security analysis provides the same outcomes (Table 2.6). There are only the three
violations that are caused by the export from area R (1M1-1R1) and by the import into area T (75T2-
775T2, 65T2-665T2) respectively, and that are not aected by the network reinforcement. All the
WTLR sensitivities (Table 2.7) are equal to zero except for the nodes of area R, which are
Figure 2.25: Total system overload for all test cases (decreasing order)
Table 2.5: Security analysis results for all test cases
Table 2.6: Security analysis results - New line 1M1-5M1 or 2M1-5M1
Table 2.7: WTLR sensitivities - New line 1M1-5M1 or 2M1-5M1
still positive but lower than in the base case, and for some nodes in area T, that are
still negative but higher than in the base case (lower absolute value).
2.4.4.2 A WTLR-based metric for transmission planning
The simulation results described in the previous paragraph have highlighted that:

a network reinforcement, if properly chosen, can reduce the occurrence and/or
the size of branch overloads;

consequently, the WTLR sensitivities vary according to the security analysis outcomes,
re-sulting in a more or less considerable decrease in their absolute values.
The second consideration suggests the possibility of dening a global index or a metric which can be
used to classify the network reinforcements based on their impact on overall system security. This
metric is the WTLR algebraic sum. The bar charts of Figures 2.25 and 2.26 show an interesting
analogy: the more the total system overload decreases, the more the metric diminishes.
So the global index calculation conrms that the two lines 1M1-5M1 and 2M1-5M1 are the best
grid reinforcements in terms of security enhancement. On the basis of that, the WTLR algebraic sum
can be considered a measure of system security, as well as the total system overload, i. e. the amount of
thermal overloading that occurs during a set of simulated contingencies or forced outages.
Figure 2.26: WTLR algebraic sum
2.4.4.3 Validation of the WTLR-based metric
In competitive electricity markets, transmission capacity expansion is necessary to

increase Social Welfare and market e-ciency, besides ensuring a secure, reliable, and
uninterrupted electricity supply.
To validate the WTLR-based metric dened in the previous paragraph and so to demonstrate
that the new lines 1M1-5M1 and 2M1-5M1 are the most eective also in terms of market
e-ciency improvement, an Optimal Power Flow procedure is applied to each test case and two
standard economic indicators (Social Welfare and Congestion Revenue) are calculated as
follows:
Producer revenue (Pgen i is the production of generator i and p
gen i is the nodal marginal
price at the bus to which the generator i is connected):
Revenue =R =p P (2.31)
gen i gen i gen i gen i
Generation cost (according to the hourly cost function of generator i):

Cost =C gen i = C 0i + C 1i P gen i + C 2i P 2 (2.32)
gen i gen i

Producer surplus:
=X (R C ) (2.33)
tot i gen i gen i
Consumer surplus9 (dj and pj are the load and the nodal marginal price at bus j respectively):
X
S = (p p) d
c ref j j (2.34)
j
9The demand is supposed inelastic and so it is necessary to x a reference price for the consumers ( p ref = 150
/MWh).
¿
¿
Table 2.8: Economic indicators for all test cases ( /h)

Social Welfare:
W= tot + Sc (2.35)

Congestion Revenue:
X X
CR = p dR (2.36)
j j gen i
j i
As shown in Table 2.8, all the new lines produce a Social Welfare increase and a consequent
Conges-tion Revenue reduction compared with the base case. More precisely, four network
reinforcements, including the lines 1M1-5M1 and 2M1-5M1, produce practically the same
¿
increase in Social Welfare (about 20200 /h). It follows from this that the grid reinforcements
with the largest impact on network congestion mitigation are also among the most eective ones
from the point of view of the electricity market functioning (Figure 2.27).
2.4.4.4 An index to prioritize transmission planning
The preceding paragraphs have described the denition and validation of a WTLR-based metric
which could be used to classify network reinforcements on the basis of their impact on both system
security and electricity market e-ciency. Its calculation follows the application of the WTLR procedure
to the new test case, resulting from the addition of the new line to the base case: so this process has
to be repeated for all candidate lines. Compared to this, the methodology briey outlined in
subsection 2.2.3 has some advantages: in particular, the index calculation needs only the WTLR
values corresponding to the base case and the estimate of the expected power ow on the new line
in intact system conditions (see equation (2.9)). The method, which has been automated and
implemented in the Matlab programming language, can be summarized as follows:

dene a list of potential transmission lines;
perform a standard contingency analysis to calculate the total system overload with reference to the existing
transmission network (base case);
Figure 2.27: Social Welfare for all test cases

calculate the WTLR sensitivities (base case);

quantify the expected real power ow on the new lines in intact system conditions;

calculate the indicator with reference to each of the new lines.
The main problem is the evaluation of the power ow on the new lines. It can be solved by adding the
new line jk to the system and then quantifying Pjk with a full non-linear power ow simulation. This
process has to be performed for each line.
The list of candidate lines considered for the method validation includes: 1M1-5M1, 1M1-9V1,
2M1-5M1, 2M1-9V1, 8M1-5M1, and 8M1-9V1. Table 2.9 summarizes the results: from and to
bus WTLRs, real power ow, and index value. According to the index denition, a minus sign
means a positive eect on system security, i. e. a decrease in total system overload: the lowest
values correspond to the best network reinforcements in terms of security enhancement. Apart
from a few exceptions, the outcomes conrm the priority order already made clear by applying
the WTLR procedure to calculate the system overload and the WTLR-based metric. The
discrepancies, above all that regarding the lines 2M1-9V1 and 8M1-5M1, are probably due to
the approximations (loss-less system and linearity) considered in the index denition.
Therefore, the validation raties that the indicator can give a good indication of the impact
of a potential transmission line on total system overload and consequently on overall
system security. Thanks to its main features, especially the easiness of its calculation, it
could be adopted to evaluate new transmission connections and to help the selection of
those that provide the most eective improvements to overall system security.
This WTLR-based methodology enables an easily automated process for comparing the eects of
new lines on total system overload and above all it can estimate which new connection will have the
greatest marginal benet to system security. Thus it has proved to be a fast-screening tool to allow a
transmission system planner to evaluate a given set of alternatives. This fact demonstrates the
Table 2.9: Index validation
importance of the approach. The ability to screen a certain number of alternatives to determine a
subset of promising ones for further evaluation (e. g. economic analysis) can be very important.
2.5 Changes in the original Matlab-coded procedure

This section will describe the modications made in the original Matlab-coded program
for the cal-culation of WTLRs by introducing the Line Outage Distribution Factors, with
the aim of reducing the number of mathematical operations to be performed and
consequently the total computational time, and by adopting the distributed slack bus in
order to remove the ISDF dependence on the choice of the slack bus.
2.5.1 Introduction of the Line Outage Distribution Factors

As described in section 2.3, given a certain scenario, the basis for the WTLR calculation is
a standard contingency analysis carried out by a sequence of AC load ow calculations to
nd possible branch overloads. This step is quite time-consuming, especially for large
networks, because the Matlab-coded procedure performs a power ow in intact system
conditions and for each outage included in the contingency list. In order to improve this
process and above all to reduce the total computational time, the original procedure is
modied in the following way: it performs an AC load ow to evaluate the real power ows in N
security conditions, while the real power ows following a line outage are determined by
means of the so called Line Outage Distribution Factors (LODFs).
2.5.1.1 LODF formulation
The formulation of the Line Outage Distribution Factors can be derived examining how
the outage impacts may be simulated by net injection and withdrawal changes [21].
First of all, it is necessary to dene the so called Power Transfer Distribution Factor (PTDF),
which measures the sensitivity of line MW ows to 1 MW transfer. So the impact of a tst-MW
transaction from node s to node t on the real power ow Pjk on the line jk is Pjk and is
determined by:
st (2.37)
Pjk = P T DFjk tst
where the PTDF is dened as:

st s t
P T DF = ISDF ISDF
jk jk jk (2.38)
Figure 2.28: Impact of the transaction tst
The line st outage changes the real power ow in the post-outage network on each line connected
to s by the fraction of Pst. This impact can be simulated by introducing a transaction tst
st
in the pre-outage network (Figure 2.28). The injection tst adds a change P T DFst tst on
the line st ow and a net ow change of (1 P T DFstst) tst on all the other lines but st that are
connected to node s. By selecting tst to satisfy:
st (2.39)
1 P T DFst tst = Pst
the transaction tst changes the ow Pjk, jk 6= st, by:

st
P T DF
st jk P (2.40)
Pjk = P T DFjk tst = st st
1 P T DFst
The term
st
P T DF
jk
st (2.41)
1 P T DFst
is the Line Outage Distribution Factor of the line jk with respect to the line st outage.
Consequently, the real power ow on the line jk following the line st outage can be
approximated as:
st (2.42)
Pjk(st) Pjk + LODFjk Pst
2.5.1.2 Application to the CIGRE 63-bus system
According to what said in the previous paragraph, after carrying out a load ow in intact
system conditions and after computing the ISDFs with reference to the original
network, the procedure determines the real power ows on grid branches in N-1
security conditions by means of the LODFs. Instead of a sequence of AC load ow
calculations, the procedure thus performs this matrix computation only:
2 3 = 2 P
.. 3 + 2 (1) 3: (2.43)
(1)
P.. LODF.. P (out) P (out)
6 P (N. out) 7 6 . 7 6 . (N )
out 7 h i
6 7 6 7 6 7
P LODF
4 5 4 5 4 5
where:
all the matrices 2 RNout Nb

(Nout is the number of line outages in the
N
contingency list and b is the number of grid branches);
: is the Matlab arraywise multiplication; 10
the n-th row P (n) of the rst matrix is the vector of the real power ows following the
line outage n;
all rows of the second matrix are equal to the vector P of the real power ows in
intact system conditions;
the n-th row LODF (n) of the third matrix is the vector of LODFs with respect to
the line outage n: in particular, the element corresponding to the line to be
outaged, which cannot be calculated by equation (2.40), is set at -1 so zeroing
the post-contingency power ow on that particular line;
all columns in the fourth matrix are equal to the vector P (out) = of
T
P
P(1) (Nout)
the real power ows on the lines included in the contingency list h
in N security conditions.
i
The new procedure is applied to the base case of the CIGRE 63-bus system and the new outcomes are
compared with the original ones. The approximations used in the derivation of the Line Outage
Distribution Factors introduce an error in the calculation of
11 P
jk(st): the absolute value of the
relative error is computed as:
Exact P (2.44)
jk(st)
P Exact P
jk(st) jk(st)
where Exact P method) and

jk(st) is the real power ow determined using the AC load ow (i. e. the exact
P
jk(st) is the result obtained using the distribution factors.
To investigate the quality and robustness of the distribution factors for congestion
modelling, the absolute values of the errors (calculated for every real power ow) are
collected and then their density function is constructed. The plot in Figure 2.29 shows
that the frequency for the relative errors is high for very small values but rather low for
large errors. The corresponding cumulative distribution function is displayed in Figure
2.30: the plot indicates that the relative errors are smaller than 2% for more than 90%
of the cases, while they are above 1% in about 20% of the cases.
We, therefore, conclude that the linearization approximation in the derivation of the distribution
factors introduces these errors, but at least for a test system as the CIGRE 63-bus one its eect
on the calculation of the real power ows in N-1 security conditions is very small.
The contingency analysis results obtained using the approximate method are summarized in Ta-ble
2.10: each row lists the contingency (line st outage), together with the overloaded branch jk, the
LODF, the real power ows on the lines jk and st in intact system conditions, the post-outage line jk
power ow,and the relative error (in per cent) on Pjk(st). So, regarding the overloaded branches, the
highest absolute value of the relative error on Pjk(st) amounts to about 3.1%. Ob-viously, the
approximations also aect the overloads detected by the contingency analysis: for the
10 A: B is the element-by-element product of the arrays A and B.
11
They are the assumptions used in the derivation of DC power ow models.
Figure 2.29: Density function of the relative errors in line ow approximations
Figure 2.30: Cumulative distribution function of errors in line ow approximations
Table 2.10: Contingency analysis results by using LODFs
most part, the LODF overload is smaller than the exact one. So the total system
overload, which amounts to 1521 MW, is lower than that computed by adopting the
original procedure (1562.4 MW).
In the light of these dierences, though small, it is interesting to estimate the impact that the
approximate method for congestion modelling has on WTLR sensitivities. Figure 2.31 illustrates the
relative errors on WTLRs. It is clear that the error is small for most nodes (lower than 2%), except for
the buses of area T (3 10%). The absolute errors are however not considerable and so
the qualitative indications provided by WTLRs are still good. We can conclude that, in spite of
the approximations in the derivation of LODFs, the outcomes of the new procedure are
acceptable. The simulations also demonstrate that introducing the distribution factors to detect
possible branch overloads allows the total computational time to be reduced notably. This
improvement to the original procedure allows simulating the line outages by changing the
network topology and carrying out a sequence of AC power ow calculations to be avoided, since it
needs the computation of LODFs and the matrix calculation in equation (2.43) only.
Figure 2.31: Relative error on WTLR sensitivities using LODFs
2.5.1.3 Using the base ISDFs to compute WTLR sensitivities
To further speed up the Matlab-coded program, another simplication can be introduced:

using the base Injection Shift Distribution Factors, calculated in intact system
conditions, to determine the WTLR sensitivities. In this way, the procedure has not to
reactance matrix X
compute the post-contingency reduced NEW , given by equation
(2.28), and then the new complete ISDF-matrix for each outage.
We rst investigate the ISDF errors introduced by the changes in the network topology. For each line
outage the original procedure calculates the ISDF for every node in the system. We compute the
relative error for each ISDF by comparing it to the corresponding reference value determined in N
security conditions: ISDF base (2.45)
ISDF post ISDF base
We collect the errors and construct the density function shown in Figure 2.32. This plot demon-
strates that, although the topology changes in the network may result in major impacts on the
value of some particular ISDFs, the fraction of ISDFs which are signicantly impacted is
relatively small. The scatter plot in Figure 2.33 shows the size of relative error as a function of
the corre-sponding ISDF magnitude: it reinforces the notion that large errors are associated
primarily with small magnitude ISDFs. These results suggest using the base ISDFs to calculate
WTLR sensi-tivities, since the errors on the distribution factors are relatively small and so this
approximation should not aect the resulting indices very much.
The chart in Figure 2.34 displays the WTLRs computed: 1) by applying the original
procedure, 2) by using the base ISDFs, and 3) by using both the LODFs and the base
ISDFs. The simulations indicate that the WTLR errors stay in an acceptable range.
To conclude, the results highlight that the simplications (i. e. using the LODFs for the contingency
Figure 2.32: ISDF error density function
analysis and the base ISDFs for calculating the WTLRs) do not compromise the quality of
the information supplied by WTLR sensitivities. Furthermore, they allow performing an AC
load ow calculation and determining the modied ISDF matrix for each outage to be
avoided, so resulting in a notable reduction of the total computational time.
2.5.2 Adoption of the distributed slack bus

Besides being quite time-consuming, especially for large networks, which may not be a
real problem since the WTLRs are useful indices for power system planning, the original
procedure has an eective limit: it considers a single slack bus, i. e. concentrated slack bus,
in the power ow calculations and above all in the ISDF computation.
2.5.2.1 Impact of the choice of the slack bus
We rst investigate the impact of the selection of the slack bus on the power ow calculations and
especially on the branch overloads detected by the contingency analysis. The simulations are
performed by applying the original procedure which, as explained in section 2.3, uses a single slack
bus load ow analysis. Table 2.11 shows the total overload system with reference to ve dierent slack
buses: 41M3 (the original one), 11R3, 43F3, 61T3, and 92V3. More precisely, the congestions are
the same for all test cases and there are not big dierences in the size of the overloads: so the
impact of the system overload errors on WTLR values should be quite small.
As explained in subsection 2.3.2, the ISDF matrix is instead strictly dependent on the selection
of the slack bus in the system. So now we look into the eects of changing the slack bus on the
determination of the distribution factors and consequently of the WTLR sensitivities.
Just to investigate this aspect, the choice of the ve slack buses considered in the simulations is
made in such a way that each of the ve areas of the CIGRE 63-bus system, one at a time, is
Figure 2.33: Scatter plot of the relative errors as a function of the ISDF magnitudes
Figure 2.34: Eect of the approximations on WTLR sensitivities
Table 2.11: Contingency analysis results with dierent slack buses
the sink area (41M3-area M; 11R3-area R; 43F3-area F; 61T3-area T; 92V3-area V). Figure
2.35 clearly shows that the WTLRs depend strongly on where the slack bus is in the grid. In
particular, the arithmetic mean of the WTLR values is very dierent in the ve test cases:

41M3 case: WTLR arithmetic mean = -3.57;

11R3 case: WTLR arithmetic mean = -14.68;

43F3 case: WTLR arithmetic mean = -3.49;

61T3 case: WTLR arithmetic mean = +1.21;

92V3 case: WTLR arithmetic mean = +8.73.
In the original network the slack bus is 41M3, which has been selected because of its
baricentric position in the system. Besides demonstrating the eectiveness of the
WTLR methodology, the results described in section 2.4 highlight the quality of the
information supplied by the WTLRs and so, on the light of the above considerations,
the correcteness of selecting the node 41M3 as the slack bus.
The diagram in Figure 2.35 shows that the 43F3 case is the only similar to the base one and
we thus conclude that the two nodes 41M3 and 43F3 act in like manner as slack bus: they are
in fact electrically close, since the high voltage generator bars (44F1 and 4M1) are connected
by a double circuit line. All the WTLRs related to the 11R3 case are negative because an
injection at any node in the system, which is withdrawn from the slack bus in area R, would
produce a counter-ow on the lines 1M1-3M1 and 1R1-1M1 so resulting in a large total system
overload decrease. On the contrary, nearly all the WTLRs corresponding to the 92V3 case are
positive: the reasons are just the opposite of the previous case.
2.5.2.2 Distributed slack bus
Even though the simulations described in the previous paragraph show that the results
of the contingency analysis are little aected by the selection of the slack bus, the
distributed slack bus concept is introduced in the power ow model used by the Matlab-
coded procedure. The traditional Newton-Raphson formulation of the load ow problem
is properly modied introducing the so called participation factors in order to distribute
the real power mismatch due to uncertain system losses to a particular set of
generation units. The complete treatment of this subject is in Appendix C.
Obviously, the participating sources, chosen to act as the slack bus, are the generators
connected to the ve nodes considered in the previous paragraph, namely: 41M3, 11R3, 43F3,
92V3. The participation factors
61T3, and s are calculated as follows (Table 2.27):
Figure 2.35: WTLR values with dierent slack buses
Table 2.12: Participation factors
P (2.46)
max s
s =P
s2Ds Pmax s
where Ds is the set of generation units that function as the slack bus and Pmax s is the maximum real
power by generation unit s.
The contingency analysis results are summarized in Table 2.13. It is clear that removing
the concentrated burden of the slack bus does not cause remarkable changes with respect
to the only one slack bus test cases. The outcomes demonstrate that, in case of a single
slack bus, selecting the node 41M3 is correct for the load ow analysis: the security
assessment results in Tables 2.3 and 2.13 are practically the same.
Now we investigate the eect of assuming the distributed slack bus on the distribution
factors and consequently on the WTLR values.
We dene the Distributed Slack Injection Shift Distribution Factor (DSISDF) as the change in
Table 2.13: Contingency analysis results using the distributed slack bus power ow
Figure 2.36: Cumulative distribution function of jDSISDF ISDF j
a line real power ow in response to 1 MW injection at a particular bus and a

corresponding withdrawal at the distributed slack buses assuming participation factor
control. The DSISDF mathematical formulation12 is [22]:
X
DSISDFjk
i
= bjk (Xji Xki) + bjk (Xjs Xks) (2.47)
s
s2Ds
To evaluate the impact of adopting the distributed slack bus on the distribution factors,
we compute the absolute error for each DSISDF by comparing it to the corresponding
reference value (ISDF) determined by using a single slack bus model:
jDSISDF ISDF j (2.48)
The cumulative distribution function is displayed in Figure 2.36: the plot indicates that the absolute
errors are smaller than 0.06 for more than 90% of the cases. Since by denition the distribution
factors may be at most equal to unity, these dierences might be even non-negligible.
The WTLR sensitivities are now calculated as follows:
W T LRi = N P
jk i jk i (2.49)
DSISDFjk PCO;jk + st DSISDFjk st
viol (st) CO;jk
P
P SY P
Overload S
Figure 2.37 shows the indices calculated by equation (2.8), i. e. considering a single slack bus
(41M3), and by equation (2.49), i. e. adopting the distributed slack bus, respectively. It is clear that
the dierences between the ISDFs and the DSISDFs aect the WTLR sensitivities which are in
general smaller in case of removing the concentrated burden of the slack bus. However, from a
12
The DSISDF formulation is obtained considering the assumptions used in the derivation of DC power ow models.
Figure 2.37: Impact of adopting a distributed slack bus model on WTLRs
qualitative viewpoint there are not substantial changes.

We can conclude that in any case the most correct choice is to assume a distributed slack
bus model, so making the ISDFs and the WTLRs completely indipendent of the selection
of the slack bus. But the simulations highlight that the results can be little aected by the
only one slack bus assumption on condition that the slack bus is suitably chosen.
2.6 Tests on the Italian EHV system

To assess the performances of the WTLR approach and of the Matlab-coded program on large
systems, some tests are carried out on detailed models of the Italian EHV network (380 kV and
220 kV). This section will rst investigate the impact of assuming the approximation that the line
MVA rating is a MW limit in determining the branch overloads. Then the simulations will show
that the WTLR methodology can be used with dierent purposes for power system planning.
2.6.1 The MVA rating approximation

As described in section 2.3, the original methodology assumes the approximation that the line
MVA rating is a MW limit and so it ignores both the actual voltage magnitude and the power
factor cos'. We now investigate the eect of this assumption on security assessment results and
on WTLR sensitivities.
The procedure is applied to the Italian EHV electric system with reference to a summer peak load
condition at the projection horizon of the year 2013. Such a kind of scenario is chosen since the line
current limits allowed in summer are lower than in winter and so it may represent a very stressed
operation condition for the Italian network. The nodal loads, the available power plants, and the
amount of the electricity import refer to what published by the Italian TSO in its development plan [23]
for the projection horizon considered in the study.
Table 2.14: Contingency analysis results (original procedure)
The main hypotheses assumed in the analysis are:

the power productions of the thermoelectric plants refer to an unconstrained
clearing market point: in other words, the schedule is the result of a -dispatching
procedure that takes into account the economic merit order only, while ignoring
any transmission system constraint. As result of the unconstrained market, the
Italian transmission system may be harmfully stressed in peak load conditions,
since the main power plants are not always close to the load areas;

the N-1 security assessment is carried out including in the contingency list the
outages of all 380 and 220 kV lines;

unlike what we previously assumed for the CIGRE 63-bus system tests, the power
ow limits considered in N-1 security conditions are not increased by 20% of their
rating; so in both N and in N-1 security conditions they are calculated as: 13
p
Limitjk = M V A ratingjk = 3 VnIn (2.50)
2.6.1.1 Original procedure results
The contingency analysis performed by the original Matlab-coded program gives the results sum-
marized in Table 2.14. The Italian 380 kV network at the year 2013, according to the grid devel-
opment plan, is represented in Figure 2.38, which helps us to locate the geographical position of the
outaged and overloaded lines. Some 380 kV bus WTLRs are shown in Table 2.15.
2.6.1.2 Check by a standard steady-state security assessment tool
To control the correctness of the results obtained by assuming the MVA rating approximation, a
standard steady-state security assessment tool is applied to the Italian test case. This tool, which
performs a load ow calculation for each outage in the contingency list, determines the line currents
and compares them to the corresponding current limits so detecting the actual overloads. The
outcomes are summarized in Table 2.16, which clearly shows that assuming the MVA rating
approximation introduces some errors in the contingency analysis results. All the power ows ex-
pressed in per cent of the corresponding limits in Table 2.14 are higher than the per cent currents
13 The coe-cient k, which allows the line thermal limits to be increased in N-1 security conditions, is set to unity.
Figure 2.38: Outaged and overloaded 380 kV lines
Table 2.15: WTLR sensitivities (original procedure)
Table 2.16: Check by a standard steady-state security assessment tool
Table 2.17: Contingency analysis results (considering the actual voltage magnitudes)
in Table 2.16. Moreover, six violations detected by the original procedure are not conrmed by the
standard security assessment tool: actually the outage of the 380 kV lines Ferrara Focomorto-
Ferrara Nord, Lonato-Nogarole Rocca, Sermide St.-Crevalcore, Valmontone-Presenzano, and Avel-
lino Nord-Bisaccia (one at a time) do not cause any network congestions, while the outage of the
380 kV line Ariano Irpino-Benevento overloads the 380 kV line Gissi St.-Villanova only.
2.6.1.3 Considering the actual voltage magnitudes
On the basis of the results described in the preceding paragraph, it is appropriate to modify the
original methodology used to calculate the branch overloads in order to take into account the actual
voltage magnitudes instead of their rated values. The power ow limits are now computed as:
p
Limitjk = 3 VjIn (2.51)
where it is assumed that the power ow is from bus j to bus k. The new contingency analysis
outcomes are summarized in Table 2.17: the new method allows only the eective overloads to
be detected, even if the per cent power ows are little smaller than the actual ones.
2.6.1.4 Considering the actual power ow limits
cos' and so the actual power ow limits on grid

As well as the bus voltage magnitudes, the load ow calculations by using the MATPOWER
package allow us to determine the power factors
Table 2.18: Contingency analysis results (considering the actual power ow limits)
Figure 2.39: Impact of the MVA rating approximation on WTLRs
branches. So we can compute the eective per cent power ows and the eective MW
overloads (Table 2.18).
The diagram in Figure 2.39 shows the impact of the approximations adopted to calculate
the branch overloads on WTLR sensitivities. It clearly demonstrates that considering the
rated voltage magnitudes, instead of the actual ones, produces the largest errors: the
bigger the WTLR absolute value, the larger the error. On the contrary, ignoring the power
factors does not compromise the quality of the information provided by the indices.
2.6.1.5 Conclusions on the Matlab-coded procedure for WTLR calculation
On the basis of the tests on the Italian EHV system, we can conclude that the MVA rating approximation
is not suitable especially for the operation conditions in which the bus voltage magnitudes diverge from
the corresponding rated values, since in these cases it produces non-negligible errors in the contingency
analysis results and in the WTLR calculation.
Consequently, in the simulations in which it is better not to use this simplication, it is impossible
to adopt the Line Outage Distribution Factors to compute the approximate branch power ows in
N-1 security conditions, because the actual voltage magnitudes are not calculated by this
method. Moreover, the tests on the Italian EHV network demonstrate another limit of adopting
the LODF simplication: it is not able to detect the line outages that cause the non-convergence
of the load ow algorithm. For instance, this is the case of the outage of the 380 kV line Dugale-
Montecchio in the North-East: the power ows, that have to reach the 380/132 kV substations of
Montecchio and Sandrigo to meet the demand of the big load areas in the province of Vicenza,
have to cover a long electrical distance, which produces considerable voltage drops and leads
to the system collapse due to the lack of adequate reactive power resources in the area.
2.6.2 WTLR sensitivity: a tool with several uses

Other simulations aimed at showing several uses and applications of the WTLR methodology are
performed on the Italian EHV network at dierent projection horizons: the tests will demonstrate that
this methodology could be a useful tool for both generation and transmission planning and
particularly for achieving a more coherent development of the whole power system.
All the simulations, whose results will be presented in the next paragraphs, are carried out
con-sidering the main assumptions described in subsection 2.6.1, except for the fact that
the branch overloads are calculated with reference to the eective real power ow limits.
2.6.2.1 GENCO viewpoint
The WTLR methodology is founded on the basic concepts described in subsection 2.2.2.1.
The obvious use of this tool is thus the strategic generation siting, that is, to determine the
geographic locations where new generation would enhance the system security by
creating post-contingency counter-ows that would mitigate overloads under contingency
conditions. According to this, it seems that the only advantage of the strategic generation
siting is the system security improvement, which is one of the chief tasks of a System
Operator, but which does not involve the Generation Companies. Also a producer can
however benet from an exact and appropriate selection of the sites for new power plants.
In a liberalised electricity market, where there can be a strong competition among power
producers, the transmission system limits have a key role in the clearing of the market. For
instance, in Italy the violation of one or more inter-zonal limits 14 produces the separation of the
Italian system in two or more zones during the day-ahead market (the so called Mercato del
Giorno Prima) and the network constraints thus aect the market results and above all what
producer oers are accepted. In the Italian ancillary service market (the so called Mercato del
Servizio di Dispacciamento) the intra-zonal transmission constraints are taken into account and
a generation re-scheduling occurs in case of network congestions [24].
Therefore a GENCO, whose main purpose is to maximize its expected prots, may gain some
advantages from an appropriate generation siting. Besides envisaging the supply concentration and
the possible competition with other producers, its expansion plan should consider the areas
14
The Italian network is divided in the following zones: six geographical zones (North: Val d'Aosta, Piedmont,
Lombardy, Trentino Alto-Adige, Veneto, Friuli Venezia Giulia and Emilia Romagna; Central-North: Tuscany, Um-bria
and Marche; Central-South: Latium, Abruzzi and Campania, excepting the Gissi production area; South: Molise, Apulia,
Basilicata and Calabria, plus the Gissi production area; Sicily, Sardinia), seven virtual foreign zones (France,
Switzerland, Corsica, Corsica AC, Austria, Slovenia, Greece) and ve limited production areas (Monfalcone,
Foggia, Rossano, Brindisi, Priolo), as shown in Figure 2.40.
Figure 2.40: Geographical and virtual Italian zones
which are not limited by existing network bottlenecks or those where the TSO has
planned some grid reinforcements, so that its future power productions will not suer
heavy restrictions due to some network constraint. The WTLR methodology can give a
GENCO some useful indications about this issue.
The simulations on the Italian EHV network at the year 2013 15 provide the WTLR
graphical representation in Figure 2.41.
First of all, it can be used to qualitatively identify the best areas and locations for new power
plants so that they should not be heavily limited by the occurrence of network congestions. As
already highlighted by the contingency analysis results, the most critical grid element is the
middle-Adriatic backbone, particularly between the electrical substations of Gissi St. and
Villanova: it is clear that at the projection horizon the least appropriate sites are situated in
Southern Italy and especially on the Adriatic side, where there is already a strong competition
and where new power plants will be installed in the next few years.
Always with reference to a GENCO's expansion plan, the WTLR values pertinent to a given
scenario can be used to rank a set of possible new generation sites. For instance, consider the
following six candidates for a new 800 MW CCGT power plant 16
(Figure 2.42):
1. 380 kV node of Acciaiolo;
2. 380 kV node of Marginone;
3. 380 kV node of Suvereto;
4. 380 kV node of Fano;
5. 380 kV node of Villavalle;
6. 380 kV node of Presenzano.
According to the WTLR indications, the six candidates can be ranked in the following way:
15 The simulations to which Figure 2.41 refers are carried out by using the modied Matlab-coded program that
considers the actual power ow limits and not the MVA rating approximation.
16 The list reports the 380 kV nodes to which the new power plant could be connected.
Figure 2.41: WTLR map - Italian EHV system (year 2013)
Figure 2.42: Possible new generation sites (year 2013)
1. Fano (WTLR = -0.32);

2. Acciaiolo (WTLR = -0.07);
3. Marginone (WTLR = -0.06);
4. Suvereto (WTLR = -0.03);
5. Villavalle (WTLR = -0.02);
6. Presenzano (WTLR = +0.29).
In particular, it follows that the best location for a new power plant is the node of Fano, while the
worst one is the bus of Presenzano. Considering these suggestions in the denition of the expansion
plan, the risk of possible limitations due to some network constraint should be reduced. Moreover,
the whole power system will gain some advantages in terms of security enhancement.
This situation may change in consequence of the reinforcement of the Adriatic
backbone as planned by the Italian TSO within 2013-2015: 17 the WTLR dierences may
become less notable, but in any case the node of Presenzano may be still the least
attractive because of the strong competition among the power producers in the area.
A standard Optimal Power Flow, that provides the real power dispatch at the minimum
generation cost, is applied to six new test cases, each of which is derived from the
base scenario by adding one of the six new power plants. The outcomes are then
compared to the indications given by the WTLRs to conrm (or not) the above-
mentioned ranking and to estimate the overall system benet in each case.
The simulations are carried out considering the eective generation costs of the
thermoelectric power plants assumed in service, so that no conjecture is made about
the producers' oers in the electricity market.
The analysis performed by means of the OPF procedure and considering the N-1 security criterion
highlights that the most critical grid element is the middle-Adriatic backbone, so conrming that the
new generation sites to the north of this grid section are favoured by their geographical position. The
ranking of the generation sites are validated by evaluating two parameters: the dispatched power of
the new power plants, which xes their utilization hours, and the variation of the real power losses,
that aect the total generation cost and thus the system operation economy. Ta-ble 2.19 summarizes
the OPF outcomes pertinent to the six test cases. So dierent values of the dispatched power in the
second column are due to the distance (both geographical and electrical) of the new generation
sites from the load areas and also to the concentration of more or less com-petitive power
producers in the zone. The smallest value pertinent to the power plant connected to the 380 kV
node of Presenzano conrms that it will be disadvantaged by its location because it will cope with the
strong competition in Southern Italy and more precisely in Campania.
The comparison between the outcomes of the two procedure makes it evident that there is an exact
correspondence between the WTLR ranking and the results in Table 2.19. In particular, the
realization of a new CCGT power plant connected to the 380 kV node of Fano will yield the greatest
benets in terms of both system security enhancement, as suggested by the corresponding WTLR,
and reduction in power losses and total generation costs, as highlighted by the OPF calculations.
17
In the last development plan [23], to overcome the existing power limitations on the production
areas in Southern Italy, the Italian TSO has scheduled to double and reinforce the middle-Adriatic
backbone by implementing a second double-circuit line between the existing substations of Villanova
and Foggia by 2013-2014. Furthermore, to make the 380 kV network more meshed and to improve the
system reliability and the security of supply, the Italian TSO has planned to construct a new 380 kV line
between the existing substations of Fano and Teramo by 2015.
Table 2.19: OPF results (year 2013)
Figure 2.43: Possible new generation sites (year 2015)
This approach can be used also to evaluate the eect of a delay in the completion of
the grid development plan. For instance, consider the Italian EHV electric system with
reference to a summer peak load condition at the projection horizon of the year 2015
and the following set of possible new generation sites (Figure 2.43):

380 kV node of Udine Ovest;

380 kV node of Forlì;

380 kV node of Teramo;

380 kV node of Aliano.
As regards the base 2015 scenario, the steady-state security assessment, on the basis of which the
WTLR sensitivities are calculated, does not detect any network congestions: thanks to the network
reinforcements scheduled by the Italian TSO within 2015, the transmission system is able to transfer
the power ows generated by the power plants in service towards the load areas without overloading
any grid element. Consequently, it is impossible to determine the indices and to get
Table 2.20: OPF results (year 2015)
Table 2.21: Contingency analysis results (without doubling the Adriatic backbone)
useful information concerning the sites chosen for the installation of a new 800 MW
CCGT power plant.
The OPF procedure applied to four new test cases, each of which is derived from the base
scenario by adding one of the four new power plants, gives the results in Table 2.20.
Further analyses, using the WTLR tool and considering less positive assumptions about the
com-pletion of the transmission system development plan, are carried out. For example,
suppose that the doubling of the middle-Adriatic backbone between the nodes of Villanova and
Foggia is not completed by 2015, contrary to what is planned by the Italian TSO. The
corresponding contin-gency analysis results are shown in Table 2.21: for the given scenario the
only network congestions regard just the existing 380 kV line Gissi St.-Villanova. According to
the resulting WTLR indices, the four candidates can be ranked as follows:
1. Teramo (WTLR = -2.10);
2. Forlì (WTLR = -1.23);
3. Udine Ovest (WTLR = -1.03);
4. Aliano (WTLR = +2.50).
It is clear that, if the doubling of the middle-Adriatic backbone was not completed by
2015, the site of Aliano would be the least suitable for installing a new CCGT power
plant, as it could be limited by the occurrence of congestions.
Considering the data in Table 2.20, resulting from the study on the most favourable scenario in terms of
network upgrades, and the WTLR-based ranking, pertinent to the base scenario without the
reinforcement of the middle-Adriatic backbone, we can derive the priority list in Table 2.22. As pointed
out by the second column, any power plants should not be limited by the occurrence of network
congestions, if the grid development plan was completed according to what is scheduled by the Italian
TSO [23]. Indeed, the limitation on the power production at the node of Aliano,
Table 2.22: Priority list of the new generation sites (year 2015)
to which the lowest dispatched power in Table 2.22 refers, is especially due to a very
high supply concentration in Southern Italy.
To conclude, the analysis suggests that, from the producer's viewpoint, the 380 kV node of Udine
Ovest is the best site for a new CCGT power plant since it has the highest dispatchability. More-
over, it produces the largest benets for the system not only in terms of decrease in real power losses
(-20 MW), but also in terms of security enhancement. Concerning this, suppose that the main grid
reinforcements planned by the Italian TSO in the North-East (i. e. the 380 kV line Volpago-Venezia
Nord and the 380 kV double circuit line Udine Ovest-Udine Sud-Redipuglia) are not completed by
2015. The outage of the 380 kV line Dugale-Montecchio does not cause any overloads, but leads to
notable voltage drops in the area (see subsection 2.6.1.5). The installation of a new power plant
connected to the 380 kV node of Udine Ovest allows the maintenance of an adequate voltage prole
thanks to a better distribution of the real power ows in the network and to a larger availability of
reactive resources which compensate for the reactive power losses.
2.6.2.2 TSO viewpoint
One of the main tasks of a Transmission System Operator is the system security
maintenance. So one of the main objectives of the grid development plan is to reduce
the risk of network congestions and the existing limitations on the production areas.
Besides being helpful for strategic generation siting, the WTLR methodology can be successfully
used by the TSO to guide transmission planning. Some of its potential applications are:
1. to identify the weakest grid areas, where new transmission facilities have to be installed;
2. to demonstrate the benets of realizing the entire development plan within the
prearranged time limit and thus the consequences of a possible delay;
3. to assess the impact of the generation system expansion on network security;
4. to assess the eectiveness of a single grid reinforcement planned by the TSO in

terms of security enhancement and so to rank a set of grid upgrades in order to
prioritize transmission planning;
5. to determine new network reinforcements, to be included in the transmission

system devel-opment plan.
Determination of the most critical grid elements. To prove that the WTLR tool can be used by
the TSO to determine the weakest grid sections, the Matlab-coded program is applied to the Italian EHV
system with reference to a peak load condition of summer 2009. In order to
Table 2.23: Contingency analysis results (year 2009)
Figure 2.44: WTLR map - Italian EHV system (year 2009)
validate the outcomes, they will be compared with the data published by the Italian
TSO in its last development plan [23].
The contingency analysis results are summarized in Table 2.23, while the WTLR
graphical repre-sentation is illustrated in Figure 2.44.
As expected, the correctness of the outcomes is ratied by what reported in [23] about the most
critical grid areas of the current Italian grid (Figure 2.45): more precisely, the procedure results
show the inadequacy of the 220 kV network, especially in the area of Milan (overload of the line
Milano Porta Venezia-Milano Porta Volta), in Campania (overload of the line Frattamaggiore-
Starza Grande), in the North-East (overload of the line Dolo-Camin), and also the critical
operation condition of the 380 kV lines Foggia-Benevento and Gissi St.-Villanova. Obviously,
the test case does not highlight all the operation problems that involve the Italian transmission
system: this is just an example of application to demonstrate the tool usefulness.
The information provided by the WTLR map also prove the need to realize some of the network
reinforcements planned by the Italian TSO: for instance, the transmission capacity increase of the
Figure 2.45: Critical grid areas of the current Italian transmission system [23]
existing 380 kV line Foggia-Benevento (target year: 2012), the doubling of the 380 kV
middle-Adriatic backbone (target year: 2013/2014), the realization of a new 380 kV double
circuit line between the substations of Camin and Dolo in the North-East (target year:
2011/2013), and the reinforcement of the network in the area of Milan (target year: 2012).
Assessment of development plan benets. Besides identifying the most critical grid ar-eas
[19, 20], so providing interesting information for transmission planning, the WTLR tool
can be used to demonstrate the benets of completing the realization of all the network
reinforce-ments included in the development plan within the prearranged time limit and
thus to assess the consequences of a possible delay due to some impediment [22].
First a medium-term summer scenario of the Italian EHV system (Scenario A) is considered. A
second scenario (Scenario B) is derived from this one by removing all the network reinforcements
scheduled by the TSO for the ve-year period 2010-2014. Other simulations are then carried out on a
long-term summer scenario (Scenario C), from which, by eliminating all the grid reinforcements
planned for the ve-year period 2014-2019, a fourth scenario (Scenario D) is obtained.
Table 2.24 summarizes the main features of the scenarios dened to assess the benets
of the ten-year grid development plan [23], while the most important grid upgrades
(from north to south) included in it are listed in Table 2.25.
Tables 2.26 and 2.27 reports the contingency analysis results concerning the medium-
term scenar-ios.
In Scenario B, where the transmission system has the present structure, the major operation
problems, some of which are already in intact system conditions, regard the current inter-zonal
Table 2.24: Scenarios for assessing Italian EHV development plan benets
Table 2.25: Main grid reinforcements (2010 development plan)
Table 2.26: Contingency analysis results - Scenario A
section between Central-South and South, and precisely: the 380 kV lines Benevento-
Foggia and Matera-S. Soa and the Adriatic backbone, through which a large part of the
power production of Southern Italy ows towards the big load areas in Campania and in
Central Italy. Also the 380 and 220 kV transmission system between the North-West and
the North-East is aected by considerable power ows which cause some overloads in N-1
security conditions, so making the network reinforcements necessary.
The WTLR graphical representation on the bottom of Figure 2.46, pertinent to Scenario B, and
the WTLR map in Figure 2.44, concerning the current Italian EHV system, can be compared to
assess the impact of the medium-term generation expansion on network security. It is clear
that, if the main points of the development plan were not realized by 2014, so making some
existing critical situations worse, the system operation would be very di-cult: the most critical
areas would be Southern Italy, aected by a great generation expansion in recent years and
where new thermoelectric power plants and the largest part of the new wind farms expected in
the medium-term will be installed, and to a lesser extent Piedmont.
The comparison of the two maps in Figure 2.46 qualitatively shows the eectiveness of the
main network reinforcements planned by the Italian TSO in terms of system security
enhancement: their completion within 2014 will result in an overall congestion alleviation.
As regards the year 2019, the installation of new generation power plants and the electricity demand
growth could give rise to some operation problems, as shown by Table 2.29 and Figure 2.47
(bottom), above all in Central-Southern Italy, despite the medium-term transmission expansion. The
network reinforcements planned for the ve-year period 2014-2019 will result in a general
improvement, even though the 380 kV line Matera-S. Soa may be still critical because the current
grid development plan does not include the transmission capacity increase of this line.
Assessment of the impact of an increasing wind penetration on network security.

Given the concepts on which the WTLR indices are based, the most obvious use of this
tool by a Transmission System Operator is the assessment of the generation expansion
impact on system security. For instance, consider the medium-term scenario of the
preceding paragraph (i. e. Scenario A). The Italian EHV system model is dened taking into
account the wind generation expansion expected in the next few years.
Figure 2.48 shows the geographical distribution of the total wind generation capacity
installed in Italy at the end of 2009.
To get an idea of the wind power capacity that is expected to be in service in the next two years
(2011/2012), the Italian TSO considers the wind farms for which the investors have already taken a
nancial commitment to cover the grid connection charges. To outline a possible expansion scenario
with reference to the projection horizon 2014/2015, the TSO takes into account the wind farms for
which the grid connection solution has been accepted and a commitment for the preliminary
Table 2.27: Contingency analysis results - Scenario B
Table 2.28: Contingency analysis results - Scenario C

Table 2.29: Contingency analysis results - Scenario D
Figure 2.46: WTLR map - Scenarios A (top) and B (bottom)
Figure 2.47: WTLR map - Scenarios C (top) and D (bottom)
Figure 2.48: Wind generation capacity installed in Italy at the end of 2009
Figure 2.49: Wind generation capacity expected in the medium-term
plan has been undersigned (Figure 2.49).

Most of the wind power plants will be in the south of Italy and in the two major islands:
nearly 6500 MW of wind generation capacity are expected in the short-medium term. The
long-range situation in Sicily, Sardinia, Apulia, Calabria, and Campania is particularly
signicant: they are the most favourable areas in terms of wind availability, where about half
of all Italian wind farms will be installed. Note that the wind power plants connected to the
medium voltage distribution network are not displayed in Figure 2.49.
To assess the impact of an increasing wind penetration on system security in terms of
network congestion increase, consider two new test cases derived from the medium-term
scenarios of the previous paragraph (i. e. Scenarios A and B) by removing the wind farms
that will be realized within 2014 and that are supposed to be in service [25-27]. A new
scheduling of the thermoelectric units, still resulting from a merit order dispatch, needs to
be introduced. For the most part the wind power generation is replaced by the most
competitive CCGT power plants, which may be located not only in Southern Italy.
As shown on the top of Figure 2.50, the completion of the grid development plan will lead
to a general improvement in terms of congestion alleviation. The security assessment, on
which the WTLR calculation is based, does not detect any power limit violations in Central-
Southern Italy, mainly thanks to the doubling of the middle-Adriatic backbone, the
transmission capacity increase of the 380 kV line Benevento-Foggia, and the new 380 kV
line between the future substations of Deliceto and Bisaccia.
The comparison between Figures 2.46 and 2.50 shows that the installation of the new
wind farms could increase the occurrence of network congestions: this demonstrates,
even more clearly, the need to carry out the development plan of the Italian
transmission system, also considering the increasing wind penetration.
Ranking of grid reinforcements. Consider Scenario B again. Some new test cases are derived
from it by adding one of the main network reinforcements included in the grid development plan
(one for each test case). The goal is to assess the eectiveness of the single network
reinforcement, with reference to the scenario chosen for the simulations, and then to outline a
possible ranking. The analysis focuses on Central-Southern Italy. Only the most signicant tests
and results in terms of congestion alleviation will be described (see Figure 2.51).

Case B1: transmission capacity increase of the 380 kV line Benevento-Foggia.
The power plants in the area between the regions Apulia and Molise are now limited because
of the insu-cient transmission capacity of the 380 kV network that does not enable them to be
fully exploited to meet the considerable electricity demand of the neighbouring areas. In
anticipation of the new power plants which are expected to be installed in these regions in the
next few years, the transmission capacity of the existing 380 kV line Benevento-Foggia needs
to be increased. For this reasons, the line will be rebuilt by using higher capacity wires. Table
2.30 summarizes the contingency analysis outcomes pertinent to the new test case, resulting
from the original one, i. e. Scenario B, by increasing the current limit of the above-mentioned
line (from 1600 A to 2400 A). The main eect of this grid reinforcement is to solve the operation
problems that aect the existing line Benevento-Foggia: the security assessment does not detect
any overload on it. Consequently, there is a notable decrease in the indices of the nodes in
Southern Italy, though they are still quite high, especially on the
Figure 2.50: WTLR map - Scenarios A (top) and B (bottom) without the new wind farms
Figure 2.51: Network reinforcements considered in the study
Adriatic side between the substation of Gissi and the south of Apulia. On the contrary, the
WTLRs of the 380 kV buses of Villanova, Teramo, Rosara, Candia, and Fano decrease. In
particular, the highest and the smallest values refer to the nodes of Gissi St. and Villanova
respectively, since the most critical grid element is the line between these two substations.

Case B2: doubling of the middle-Adriatic backbone.
The recent development of the electrical system in Southern Italy has led to the limitation of
some power plants, particularly in the areas of Brindisi and Foggia. To overcome these prob-
lems and to avoid further ones in the future, the Italian TSO has planned the reinforcement of
the middle-Adriatic backbone by building a second double circuit line between Foggia and
Villanova. Table 2.31 reports the contingency analysis results concerning this new test case. It
is clear that the doubling of the middle-Adriatic backbone is very important to enhance the
network security. The number of congestions decreases in Central-Southern Italy: the security
assessment detects one violation in the 220 kV transmission system in Campania and two
overloads on the 380 kV line Matera-S. Soa. Therefore, besides solving the operation
problems that aect the existing line between the substations of Foggia and Teramo, the grid
reinforcement in question also avoids the congestions on the 380 kV line Benevento-Foggia,
as there is another path to transfer the power production of the generators in Apulia.

Case B3: new 380 kV double circuit line Montecorvino-Avellino N.-Benevento.
The authorization of new power plants in Calabria, Apulia, and Campania makes the rein-
forcement of the transmission system necessary to remove the limitations on the present and
future power productions due to the occurrence of congestions in the EHV grid in Campania.
The Italian TSO has planned the realization of a new 380 kV double circuit line between
Table 2.30: Contingency analysis results (Benevento-Foggia reinforcement)
Table 2.31: Contingency analysis results (middle-Adriatic backbone reinforcement)
Table 2.32: Contingency analysis results (new line Montecorvino-Benevento)
Montecorvino and Benevento, together with a new 380/150 kV substation to the north of
Avellino that will be connected to both the new line and the existing 380 kV line Matera-S.
Soa. The contingency analysis results are given in Table 2.32. First of all, the construction of
the new line, which makes the 380 kV network more meshed, solves the congestions on the
380 kV line Benevento-Foggia in consequence of the outage of the 380 kV line Avellino Nord-
S. Soa. This is the main eect, even if the size of all the other overloads in Central-Southern
Italy diminishes. Nevertheless, this improvement yields only a small decrease in the positive
WTLR values, especially on the Adriatic side, which reects the operation problems of the
middle-Adriatic backbone and of the line Benevento-Foggia.

Case B4: new 380 kV line Deliceto-Bisaccia.
The Italian TSO has planned the construction of a new 380/150 kV substation near Deliceto in
Apulia that will be connected to the existing 380 kV line Foggia-Candela and that will collect
the power productions of the wind farms expected in the area. It will be connected also to the
future substation of Bisaccia and thus to the existing 380 kV line Matera-S. Soa. The goal is to
make the 380 kV grid more meshed and to reduce the risk of congestion, so removing the
probable limitations on the new power plants in Apulia and on the Adriatic side, including the
wind power production in the area of Candela. As shown by the security assessment results in
Table 2.33, the grid reinforcement in question produces an overall congestion alleviation. The
most evident improvement refers to the 380 kV line Benevento-Foggia which is not overloaded
by the outage of the 380 kV lines Teramo-Villanova and Gissi St.-Villanova any longer: the
power ows that reach the node of Foggia cannot be conveyed by the middle-Adriatic
backbone; in this case they can ow not only on the line Benevento-Foggia, but also on the
new line Deliceto-Bisaccia and then on the line Matera-S. So a. Some
Table 2.33: Contingency analysis results (new line Deliceto-Bisaccia)
operation conditions however get worse. For instance, the size of the overloads on the
line Benevento-Foggia following the outage of the line Avellino Nord-S. Soa increases, as
the power ows on the line Matera-S. Soa, once the substation of Bisaccia has been
reached, can be transmitted by the new line towards the bus of Foggia. Moreover, in case
of the outage of the line Benevento-Foggia, besides the congestion on the line Gissi St.-
Villanova, the security assessment detects also the overload on the line Bisaccia-Avellino
Nord: the power ows, arrived at the bus of Foggia, have to be conveyed partly by the
middle-Adriatic backbone, partly by the new line Deliceto-Bisaccia, since they cannot ow
on the outaged line Benevento-Foggia.
To dene a priority list of the above grid reinforcements, rstly we can consider the variation of the
total system overload with respect to the base case (Scenario B), which measures the eectiveness
of each transmission upgrade in terms of congestion alleviation with reference to the scenario
considered in the study. A summary of the contingency analysis results is given in Table 2.34. The
number of violations and the system overload provide a clear indication of the eects of each
transmission reinforcement. As already shown by the detailed description of each test case, the
largest benets derive from doubling the middle-Adriatic backbone, that will indeed aect a grid
section on which the TSO has detected some congestions in certain present operation conditions
and which may become more and more critical in the future in view of the expected generation
system development in South Italy and especially considering the growing utilization of wind power.
Furthermore, compared to the other grid reinforcements, it does not consist in constructing a single
line, or in increasing the current limit of an existing one, but in realizing a set of new lines according
to a well-designed scheme so increasing the available transmission capacity of the grid section and
making it more meshed. Also the calculation of one of the two metrics de ned and validated for
Table 2.34: Summary of the contingency analysis results
Figure 2.52: WTLR algebraic sum
the CIGRE 63-bus system, that is, the WTLR algebraic sum, strengthens the above
conclusions since it reects the size of the reduction of the WTRLs (in absolute value)
and consequently of their algebraic sum in each case (Figure 2.52).
Though the above results provide quantitative data concerning the benets of each
transmission reinforcement, one of the main advantages of the WTLR indices is their
ability to be graphically represented and to supply interesting qualitative information about
the most severe congestions and the most critical grid sections. The next gures (Figures
2.53-2.56) show the WTLR maps resulting from the analysis of each test case.
The comparison between the maps before (i. e. relative to Scenario B, see Figure 2.46 on the
bottom) and after adding a grid reinforcement highlights the eectiveness of the transmission
upgrade in reducing network congestions in Central-South Italy. This analysis suggests the following
priority order, which is also conrmed by the total overload values and by the WTLR-based metric:
1. doubling of the middle-Adriatic backbone (12 congestions; total overload = 967.8

MW; WTLR algebraic sum = +30.49);
2. transmission capacity increase of the line Benevento-Foggia (17 congestions; total overload
Figure 2.53: WTLR map (Benevento-Foggia reinforcement)
Figure 2.54: WTLR map (middle-Adriatic backbone reinforcement)
Figure 2.55: WTLR map (new line Montecorvino-Benevento)
Figure 2.56: WTLR map (new line Deliceto-Bisaccia)
= 2173.5 MW; WTLR algebraic sum = +106.21);
3. new double-circuit line Montecorvino-Avellino Nord-Benevento (21 congestions;

total over-load = 2663.1 MW; WTLR algebraic sum = +137.67);
4. new line Deliceto-Bisaccia (23 congestions; total overload = 2943.1 MW; WTLR
algebraic sum = +155.68).
We can conclude that the transmission planner can get useful information for dening a
priority list of a set of grid reinforcements by comparing all the WTLR maps which are
immediately comprehensible to everyone, considering the meaning of the indices.
Denition of new grid reinforcements. The WTLR methodology has been demonstrated to
be a useful tool for determining the most critical grid elements and sections, given a
certain scenario. Therefore, it can be used to dene new network reinforcements to be
included in the development plan.
The contingency analysis results (Table 2.28) and the WTLR map (on the top of Figure 2.47) in
Scenario C, which refers to the projection year 2019, indicate that, considering the scenario under
study, the only overloads are on the 380 kV line Matera-S. Soa between the future substations of
Bisaccia and Avellino Nord in case of the outage of one of the two lines Ariano Irpino-Benevento and
Aliano-Matera. These congestions are probably due to some existing limitations obliging the TSO to
operate the line with a current limit of 1920 A, as well as the development of generation and load
expected in the next decade. To solve these operation problems the transmission planner should
take into proper consideration the transmission capacity increase of the line in question, including it
in the development plan. To simulate the realization of the grid upgrade by 2019, the current limit of
the line Matera-S. Soa is increased from 1920 A to 2400 A in the network model used for the tests
(Scenario C). Since the contingency analysis does not detect any congestion, all the WTLRs in the
long-term are equal to zero and the corresponding map is entirely white-coloured.
2.6.2.3 Interchangeability of generation expansion and transmission development
Considering the basic concept of the WTLR methodology, that is, the strategic generation siting
in favour of system security, and the indications given by the WTLR values concerning the
most suitable grid areas for installing new generating capacity, two 800 MW CCGT power
plants are added to the network model in Scenario B and connected to the lowest WTLR buses
in Central-Southern Italy (Villanova = -1.60 and Benevento = -1.78) [22]. The aim is to evaluate
the benets of the new power injections and their eects on grid congestion alleviation. The new
generators are dispatched at their rating, while the power production of Apulia and Abruzzi
regions is reduced by the same amount (Case B5).
The above sites are chosen according to their WTLR so that the power injections of the new CCGT
plants help in alleviating the overloads on the lines Ariano Irpino-Benevento and Gissi St.-Villanova.
Negative-WTLR regions are in fact at the receiving end of at least one congested grid element,
while positive-WTLR areas are at the sending end. Real power injections at a negative-value bus
will therefore produce counter-ows which will contribute to congestion alleviation.
The security assessment results in Table 2.35 are alike to those obtained by realizing the doubling
of the middle-Adriatic backbone (see Table 2.31). Obviously, the network in Northern Italy is not
aected by the power production of the new plants, which instead solve all the congestions
Table 2.35: Contingency analysis results (New CCGT power plants)
Table 2.36: WTLR values at some nodes in Central-South Italy
on the lines Ariano Irpino-Benevento and Gissi St.-Villanova. Also the remaining overloads
in Central-South Italy (on the 220 kV line Frattamaggiore-Starza Grande in Campania
region and on the 380 kV line Teramo-Rosara in Marche region) are practically the same.
The WTLR values of some 380 kV nodes in Central-Southern Italy are in Table 2.36
with refer-ence to Scenario B, Case B2 (i. e. doubling of the middle-Adriatic
backbone), and Case B5 (i. e. installation of new CCGT plants).
The comparison between the second column and the last one shows that the installation of new
generating capacity at Villanova and Benevento buses signicantly improves the network security.
The third and fourth columns conrm the above considerations on the outcomes of the contingency
analysis. The WTLRs are in fact nearly the same, as the security assessment results are alike.
The tests on Case B2 and Case B5 demonstrate the interchangeability of generation and
trans-mission expansion and especially that, if appropriately located, the real power
injection of a new generating unit may have the same e ect of a grid reinforcement in terms of
system security en-hancement. Moreover, they prove that the WTLR methodology can be useful to
achieve a more coherent development of the whole power system thanks to a more coordination
between generation expansion and transmission development.
2.7 Chapter conclusions

Restructuring have introduced competition in the generation and, in some cases, in the
retail segments of the electric power industry. A common element of restructuring is the
unbundling of generation and transmission, with the latter being opened for use by all
eligible market participants under the so called open-access regime. This has greatly
transformed the traditional power industry and introduced many new challenges in all
aspects of generation, transmission and system operation and planning.
The unbundling of generation, transmission, and distribution has resulted in multiple parties in the
business. To foster competition and pre-empt market power abuse, some jurisdiction required
generation divestiture to create more independent generation owners. The generation enterprises,
unlike the integrated utility of the regulated world, have dierent and sometimes conicting ob-jectives.
The presence of new structures and the diversity of the many new players in electricity markets
have fundamentally invalidated some assumptions and relationships of the traditional planning
process, bringing new challenges especially to the transmission planning problem.
In the restructured industry, generation expansion decisions are made by individual generation
companies, often not completely known to the authority responsible for transmission planning.
Indeed beyond the ve- or ten-year horizon, generation scenarios are largely unknown. Moreover,
generation expansion decisions may be aected by decisions on transmission expansion and vice
versa. All these aspects resulting from the electricity industry restructuring and liberalisation may
cause a conict between generation owners' investments and transmission planners' decisions,
especially because of the diversity of their interests and objectives. This lack of coordination in the
planning process may be a serious problem for the operation of power systems, that are large-
scale, integrated, and complex engineering systems, which intrinsically need a certain level of
centralized coordination to function. In particular, it may have heavy repercussions on network
security and hence on electricity market e-ciency and social welfare.
The chapter has shown the interchangeability of generation and transmission
investments and particularly it has highlighted that generation expansion may have the
same (positive) eect of a transmission reinforcement on power system security. The
WTLR methodology is based just on this concept, which suggests the advantages of
strategic generation siting not only for network security enhancement, but also for
better and more e-ciently exploiting the available generation park.
A procedure for the calculation and graphical representation of WTLRs has been implemented in the
Matlab programming language and described in detail in the chapter. It has been applied to a test
system (CIGRE 63-bus network) in order to check the outcomes' correctness. Besides identifying
the most suited network sites for installing new generating units, which is the basic idea of the
WTLR methodology, the contingency analysis results and the consequent WTLR map provide useful
information also about the most critical grid areas and elements. Some simulations have been
performed considering a possible set of new transmission lines for the CIGRE network. The choice
of the grid reinforcements and in particular the selection of the new lines' endings have been based
on the WTLR values: the from bus has a negative index, while the to bus has a positive one, so that
the new line will certainly alleviate grid congestions and improve network security. Then a priority list
of the new lines has been de ned according to the total system overload decrease achieved thanks to
each new grid element. This ranking has been validated from an economic perspective by calculating
the social welfare increase by means of an Optimal Power
Flow procedure. Two simple indicators, which can be used to prioritize transmission planning,
have been proposed: the algebraic WTLR sum, which can be considered a measure of overall
system security, as well as the total system overload, and an index that can estimate which
new connection will have the greatest marginal benet to network security.
The tests on the CIGRE 63-bus system have suggested some possible modications to
be made in the proposed procedure coded in the Matlab programming language.
The rst objective has been the reduction of the total computational time. The most time-
consuming phases are the standard contingency analysis, carried out by a sequence of AC
load ow calculations (one for each line outage), and the calculation of ISDFs in N-1 security
condi-tions. The Line Outage Distribution Factors (LODFs) have been introduced in the
determination of the real power ows on grid branches in post-contingency conditions, so
substituting the stan-dard contingency analysis. To further speed up the Matlab-coded
program, another simplication has been considered: using the base ISDFs to compute the
WTLR indices. The eect of these two approximations has been investigated, showing that they
do not cause large errors. The second objective has been to remove the WTLR dependance
on the selection of the slack bus in the grid. The concept of distributed slack bus has been
introduced in both load ow calculations and ISDF computation. The simulations have shown
that in any case the most correct choice is to assume a distributed slack bus model, but at the
same time they have highlighted that the results can be little aected by the only one slack bus
assumption on condition that the slack bus is suitably selected among the grid nodes.
The second part of the chapter refer to the tests on the Italian EHV electric system. First, the most
important limit of the original methodology has been pointed out. The impact of the MVA rating
approximation (i. e. the approximation that the line MVA rating is a MW limit, so disregarding both
the actual voltage magnitude and the power factor) on security assessment results and WTLR
sensitivities has been investigated by means of a standard steady-state security assessment tool.
The check has shown that the MVA rating approximation introduces notable errors in the
contingency analysis results. Therefore, the original Matlab-coded program has been suitably
modied by considering the actual power ow limits in the calculation of the branch overloads. The
WTLR tool has been then applied to dierent test cases in order to demonstrate its usefulness for
generation and transmission planning. Although the basic idea of the WTLR methodology is the
strategic generation siting to improve power system security, it can be a helpful tool also for
generation owners, that can benet from an appropriate selection of the locations for installing new
power plants: considering the suggestions given by WTLRs in the denition of the expansion plan,
the risk of possible limitations due to some network constraint could be reduced. Moreover, given a
certain set of possible new generation sites, the WTLR indices can be used to dene a priority list.
Since the fundamental objective at which the WTLR methodology aims is power system
enhancement and this is one of the main tasks of system operators, the obvious application of the
tool is transmission planning. The tests on the Italian EHV network have shown some of its potential
uses. The transmission planner can make use of it to identify the weakest grid sections and
elements, to demonstrate the benets of the grid development plan, to assess the impact of
generation expansion on network security, to dene possible priority lists of planned grid
reinforcements, and to determine new network enhancements.
The WTLR sensitivities have therefore proved to be a simple, but eective instrument for both
generation and transmission planning. It is based on simple concepts since it is founded on load ow
calculations and sensitivity computations. But at the same time it is e ective especially thanks
to the graphical representation of WTLRs which, though provides only qualitative

information, is extremely intelligible. We can conclude that its main advantage is to
allow a more coherent devel-opment of the whole power system to be attained, since it
exploits the concept of interchangeability of generation and transmission.
Chapter 3
Reactive power service
Traditionally, electric utilities have been vertically integrated monopolies that have built gener-ation,
transmission, and distribution facilities to serve the needs of the customers. For the past decade,
the electric power industry has been going through a process of transition and restruc-turing by
moving away from vertically integrated monopolies and towards competitive markets. This has been
achieved through a clear separation between transmission and generation activities (unbundling),
as well as by creating competition in the generation sector. The restructuring pro-cess has created
certain class of services such as frequency regulation, voltage and reactive power control, energy
imbalance, and generation and transmission reserves, which are essential to the power system in
addition to the basic energy and power delivery ones. This class of services is referred to as
ancillary services, and they are indispensable to ensure system security, reliability, and e-ciency.
Ancillary services are no longer an integral part of the electricity supply, as they used to be in the
vertically integrated power industry structure, since they are now unbundled and also priced
separately. So the main issues are to identify what kind of services are indispensable to ensure the
electricity supply with certain quality standards, to dene the most suitable methods for their
acquisition, to evaluate the exact amount of each service that is necessary to operate the system
reliably, and nally to set up the proper remuneration mechanisms for the suppliers, if the regulation
provides for this eventuality.
In a competitive environment, the provision of these services must be carefully managed so
that the power system requirements and market objectives are adequately met. The System
Operator is the entity entrusted to their acquisition through commercial transactions with
ancillary services providers. Currently, there is not a single international classication of ancillary
services, but each electricity market has its own denition. There are however similarities in the
denition of the ancillary services in the dierent contexts, at least regarding their functions. The
main dierences are usually in the methods adopted for their provision and remuneration.
Reactive power and voltage support is recognized as ancillary service, since it is essential
to ensure a secure power system operation. From this perspective, the objectives are
essentially the main-tainance of appropriate voltage proles in all grid nodes, so
guaranteeing certain standards of power quality, and of su-cient, well-distributed reactive
power margins to compensate for disturbances in case of contingency.
But, in the competitive electricity market environment, the provision of such a service must take into
account the economics in addition to the technical and physical considerations and so depends on
the market players and the electricity market rules. In particular, competition in generation
9
1
CHAPTER 3. REACTIVE POWER SERVICE 92
makes it important to consider the development of a reactive power market that complements the
existing energy market. Although the cost of reactive power production is much less than that of real
power, reactive power is critical to system reliability since its su-cient provision is necessary to avoid
an extremely costly system collapse. Moreover, under stressed system conditions, reactive power
requirements from some generators are only met at the expense of reducing their real power output,
and hence they signicantly increase the cost associated with reactive power production. Besides
this new aspect deriving from the restructuring and liberalisation of the electricity industry, the
increasing attention towards renewable sources and especially towards wind energy has raised
another important issue for power system operation and in particular for reactive power provision.
Wind farms that are large enough to be connected to the transmission system tend to be erected in
remote areas or even oshore because of their dimension and impact on the scenery. Given that the
bus voltage is a local quantity, it can be di-cult to control the voltage at these distant places by use
of conventional power stations elsewhere in the grid. Therefore, wind turbines are required to have
voltage control capabilities. The voltage control capabilities of wind turbines are becoming an
increasingly important consideration regarding grid connection and also the turbines' market
potential. Furthermore, large-scale wind farms may make it necessary to install voltage control
devices in the transmission network, irrespective of the voltage control capabilities of the wind
turbines themselves: even if the wind turbines have exactly the same voltage control capabilities as
the conventional synchronous generators whose output they replace, there will be no guarantee that
they can full the voltage control task of these generators. Therefore, it may be unavoidable to
consider and take additional measures to control the grid voltage.
These issues will be investigated in the chapter, and in particular an approach, based on an Optimal
Reactive Power Flow (ORPF) procedure, aiming at solving the optimal reactive power provision
problem, considering the dierent views of buyers and sellers (i. e. the System Operator and the
producers), will be considered. It will allow the determination of the value of VAR support required to
the generation buses for the fullment of the constraints imposed by a secure and economic system
operation, while suggesting a suitable nancial compensation scheme for reactive power service and
above all the implementation of a zonal reactive market based on the Secondary Voltage Regulation
areas. The simulation analyses will focus also on the perspective impact of large wind power
injections on the voltage control performances in the Italian EHV electrical system. In particular, the
outcomes will evaluate the economy and security level achievable in the Italian system at 2014
peak-load under optimal reactive power schedules. Finally, the tests will allow the eects of the
planned network reinforcements to be assessed.
3.1 Ancillary services

As anticipated, the identication of the ancillary services can be di-cult because there is
not a single denition internationally recognized. In fact, dierent approaches can be
adopted for dening them.
3.1.1 Denitions in the U.S. markets

In its Order 888 [28], the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission of the United States of America
(FERC) denes ancillary services as those services necessary to support the transmission of electric
power from seller to purchaser given the obligations of control areas and transmitting utilities within
those control areas to maintain reliable operations of the interconnected transmission system.
FERC Order 888 requires transmission providers to include six ancillary services in an open-
access transmission tari to maintain reliability within and among the control areas aected by the
transmission service. These six services are divided into the following two categories:

Services that FERC requires transmission providers to oer and customers to
accept from the transmission provider, and these include:
scheduling, system control, and dispatch: this service is required to schedule

the move-ment of power through, out of, within, or into a control area in order
to maintain supply-demand balance;
reactive supply and voltage control from generation sources: the System
Operator re-quires generators to produce (or absorb) reactive power in order
to maintain the system bus voltages within some desired limits.

Services that FERC requires transmission providers to oer but which customers can
accept from the transmission provider, third parties, or by self-supply, and these include:
regulation and frequency response: the use of generation equipped with

governors and automatic generation control (AGC) to follow the instantaneous
change in the load in order to maintain continuous generation-load balance
within the control area, and a scheduled interconnection frequency at 60 Hz;
energy imbalance: the use of generation to correct for hourly mismatches between
actual and scheduled delivery of energy between suppliers and their customers;
operating reserve - spinning: spinning reserve service is provided by

unloaded generating units that can respond immediately to correct for
generation-load imbalance in the event of a system contingency;
operating reserve - supplemental: supplemental reserve service is provided
by unloaded generating units, by quick-start generation, or by interruptible
load to correct for generation-load imbalance in the event of a system
contingency; however the response does not have to be immediate, as in
case of spinning reserve, but rather within a short period of time.
FERC does not specify technical details of the services, and the costing methods for
the services remain ad hoc, varying widely from one provider to another.
Some organizations, including the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC), do
not agree with the denition given by FERC and especially with the name ancillary services,
since these services are not auxiliary, but an integral part of the transmission utilities.
In their technical report [33] Hirst and Kirby presents a survey based on the work of several others,
including FERC [28], Houston Lighting & Power [34], the Michigan Public Service Commission [35],
the New York Power Pool [36], and the North American Electric Reliability Council [37]. This
technical report denes the ancillary services as those functions performed by electrical generating,
transmission, system-control, and distribution system equipment and people to support the basic
services of generating capacity, energy supply, and power delivery. The authors thus develop the set
of ancillary services by identifying those services that are essential to maintain electric system
reliability, are required to eect a transaction, or are a consequence of a transaction. They instead
exclude the services that are optional, long-term in nature, too cheap to warrant the
costs of metering and billing, naturally bundled with other services, or very location
specic. The set of services comprises scheduling and dispatch and several generating
services, such as load following, reliability, and supplemental reserves, as well as loss
replacement and energy imbalance. Finally, it includes system voltage control, which
requires both generating units and transmission system equipment.
NERC follows up on FERC's initiative by conducting its own more technical study to
identify ancillary services. In particular, NERC refers to ancillary services as
Interconnected Operation Services (IOS) [37], so emphasizing their essential role in the
reliable operation of interconnected bulk electricity systems as the U.S. one. Together with
the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), NERC denes twelve IOS that are necessary
to support the transmission of power at an adequate level of reliability and security; some
of these services are similar to the six ancillary services required by FERC. They are:

regulation: using generation or load in order to maintain a minute-to-minute
generation-load balance within the control area;

load following: the provision of generation and interchange capability required to
maintain the hour-to-hour and daily load variations not covered by regulation service;

energy imbalance;

operating reserve - spinning;

operating reserve - supplemental;

back-up supply: electric generating capacity used to replace a generation outage
or the failure to deliver generation due to an outage of transmission sources, and
to serve a customer's load that exceeds its generation;

system control: activities that are required to ensure the reliability of the North
American interconnections, to minimize transmission constraints, and to
guarantee the recovery of the system after a contingency or disturbance;

reactive power and voltage control from generation sources;

network stability services from generation sources: using special equipment or devices,
such as power system stabilizers and dynamic braking resistors, at the generating plants
to meet NERC reliability requirements and maintain a secure transmission system;

system black start capability: the availability of generating units that can start without an
outside electrical supply to take part in the restoration plan after a system blackout;

real power transmission losses: the provision of capacity to replace energy
losses on a trans-mission system;

dynamic schedule: the provision of the real-time monitoring, telemetering, computer
software, hardware, communications, engineering, and administration that are
needed to electronically move real energy services associated with generation or
load out of its Host Control Area and into a dierent Electronic Control Area.
NERC IOS Working Group also identies an Ancillary Services Market Framework consisting of two
distinct parts: a resource supply market and an ancillary service delivery market [29].
3.1.2 Ancillary services in Europe

The European Directive 2003/54/EC [30] says: ancillary services means all services
necessary for the operation of a transmission or distribution system. Among the tasks
of Transmission System Operators, it indicates the responsability for ensuring a
secure, reliable and e-cient electricity system and, in that context, for ensuring the
availability of all necessary ancillary services insofar as this availability is independent
from any other transmission system with which its system is interconnected.
European UCTE Operation Handbook [31] gives the following denition: Ancillary
services are Interconnected Operations Services identied as necessary to eect a
transfer of electricity between purchasing and selling entities (transmission) and which
a provider of transmission services must include in an open access transmission tari.
Ancillary services are dened by the Union of the Electricity Industry - EURELECTRIC [32]
as all services required by the transmission or distribution system operator to enable them
to maintain the integrity and stability of the transmission or distribution system as well as
the power quality. Ancillary services are procured by the system operators and are
provided by network users (generators, customers) or system assets. Acknowledging that
several further ancillary services can be and currently are dened in dierent countries, this
report discusses the following ancillary services: frequency control, voltage control,
spinning reserve, standing reserve, black-start capability, remote automatic generation
control, grid loss compensation, and emergency control action.
A possible general cathegorization is:

interconnection services:
frequency response;
special protection schemes: generator tripping and load shedding;

generation-demand imbalance services:
regulation;
load following;
contingency reserves: spinning and non-spinning reserves;

local services:
reactive support;
black-start.
3.1.3 The Italian ancillary services

As regards the Italian situation, the ancillary service topic has been treated according to the
guidelines of the European Directive 96/92/EC [38], which have been formally acknowledged
by the Italian Regulatory Authority (Autorità per l'Energia Elettrica e il Gas - AEEG) in [39].
The denition of ancillary services accepted in Italy is the following: set of all the activities
that need to be performed to support the power transmission while maintaining a reliable
system operation and ensuring the required standards of quality and security [40].
The provision of ancillary services by the System Operator is regulated by the

regulatory order 168/03 [41], that says:

in the market for ancillary services, according to its own needs, the System
Operator provi-sions the resources necessary:
for congestion management;

to create su-cient reserves;
to maintain the supply-demand balance in real-time.

the System Operator organizes the market for ancillary services, which is subdivided
into several phases, consistent with the following objectives and criteria:
to minimize the costs and to maximize the revenues resulting from the provision;
to give market participants a clear signal of the economic value of the
resources indis-pensable to the electric system operation;
to allow market participants to bid according to their cost structures through an
appro-priate denition of resources' typologies, market mechanisms, and bids' format;
to allow the provision costs of the dierent resources to be clearly identied.
The fourth chapter of the Italian Grid Code [8] deals with the so called dispatching
rules and in particular it identies the resources indispensable to ensure a secure
system operation and certain standards of power quality:

resources for congestion management;

resources for primary reserve: they are used to automatically correct for the
istantaneous generation-load imbalance in the whole European interconnected grid;

resources for secondary reserve: they are used to compensate the generation-
load imbalance within the Italian system;

resources for tertiary reserve: they are used to constitute adequate capacity margins;

resources for energy imbalance in real-time: they are used to maintain the
supply-demand balance, to solve the network congestions, and to restore the
necessary margins of secondary reserve;

reactive reserve for primary voltage regulation;

reactive reserve for secondary voltage regulation;

black-start service;

load-rejection service, that is, a generation group must maintain its stability in the
case of its disconnection from the grid;
interruptible load service: it consists in the disconnection of load from the synchronous elec-tric system, usually performed automatically,
to control the system frequency in emergency situations, and it can be used by the System Operator if the provision of resources in the
market for ancillary services is insu-cient to ensure a secure system operation.
3.2 Reactive power

3.2.1 What is reactive power?
Almost all bulk electric power is generated, transported, and consumed in alternating
current networks. Elements of AC systems supply (or produce) and consume (or absorb or
lose) two kinds of power: real and reactive power. Real power accomplishes useful work,
while reactive power supports the voltages that must be controlled for system reliability.
In an AC electrical system, voltage and current pulsate at the system frequency and thus are
described mathematically by sine waves. Voltage is a measure of the potential energy per electric
charge, and current is a measure of the average velocity at which electrons are moving.
Although AC voltage and current pulsate at the same frequency, they peak at dierent
times. Power is the algebraic product of voltage and current. Over a cycle, power has
an average value, called real power, measured in watts. There is also a portion of
power with zero average value that is called reactive power, measured in vars. The
total power is called apparent power, measured in volt-amperes.
Reactive power has zero average value because it pulsates up and down, averaging to
zero; reactive power is measured as the maximum of the pulsating power over a cycle.
Reactive power can be positive or negative, depending on whether current peaks before
or after voltage. By convention, reactive power, like real power, is positive when it is
supplied and negative when it is consumed. Absorbing reactive power lowers voltage
magnitudes, while producing reactive power increases voltage magnitudes.
Reactive power in an electric transmission system is just the pulsating transfer of stored energy
between various kinds of electrical components in the system. Because voltage and current are
pulsating, the power on a transmission line also pulsates. In a transmission system, this
pulsating transfer of stored energy results in a loss of power called line losses. Real and
reactive power are in quadrature (90 degrees out of phase) and hence the letter Q is commonly
used to designate reactive power. Real power is commonly designated as P.
Reactive power takes up space on transmission lines. For a transmission line, the square of
the real power plus the square of the reactive power must be less than the square of the
thermal capacity (measured in volt-amperes) of the line. When thermal capacity is exceeded
signicantly for a long time, the line will sag, possibly into vegetation, causing a short circuit, or
anneal, resulting in structural damage. Real power losses in transmission lines are proportional
to the current in the line. Because power is the algebraic product of voltage and current, the
same power at high voltages has a lower current, and hence, has lower losses.
Reactive power is di-cult to transport. At high loadings, relative losses of reactive
power on transmission lines are often signicantly greater than relative real power
losses. Reactive power consumption or losses can increase signicantly with the
distance. Transmission losses lead to the expression that reactive power does not
travel well. When there is not enough reactive power supplied locally, it must be
supplied remotely, causing larger currents and voltage drops along the path [43].
3.2.2 The need for reactive power

Reactive power is directly associated with voltage, and thus voltage control is achieved in electric power
systems by absorbing/delivering reactive power. Voltage control, which implies maintaining
the voltage at each bus in the system within dened limits, is important for proper operation
of electric power equipment to prevent damage such as overheating of generators and
motors, to reduce transmission losses, and to maintain the ability of the system to
withstand disturbances, such as system faults, loss of generation, or transmission line
outage, and prevent voltage collapse. In general terms, decreasing reactive power causes
voltages to fall, while increasing reactive power causes voltages to rise. A voltage collapse
occurs when the system is trying to serve much more load than the voltage can support.
Inadequate reactive power supply lowers voltage; as voltage drops, current must increase to
main-tain the power supplied to the loads, hence causing the lines to consume more reactive
power and the voltage to drop further. Moreover, if current increases too much, transmission
lines will trip, overloading other lines and eventually causing cascading failures. If voltage drops
too low, some generators will automatically disconnect to protect themselves. Voltage collapse
occurs when an increase in load or loss of generation or transmission facilities causes dropping
voltage, which leads to a further reduction in reactive power from capacitors and line charging,
and still further voltage reductions. If the declines continue, these voltage reductions cause
additional elements to trip, leading to further reduction in voltage and loss of load. The result is
a progressive and uncontrol-lable decline in voltage, because the power system is unable to
provide the reactive power required to supply the reactive power demand.
Insu-cient reactive power at key locations in the system can also result in the inability to transfer
active power beyond a level that is often well below other system limits. As regards this issue, in
order to ensure a secure power system operation, the System Operator has to check the technical
feasibility of potential transactions resulting from energy market clearing; only the transactions that
are within the grid transfer capabilities are allowed. This is particularly important since currently,
electricity markets are usually operated under stressed loading conditions due to the increased
demand and power transfers, so increasing the risk of stability problems. Under such conditions,
system stability limits can be approximated through voltage stability limits.
Finally, reactive power is not only necessary to operate the transmission system reliably, but it can
also substantially improve the e-ciency with which real power is delivered to customers. Increasing
reactive power production at certain locations (usually near a load center) can sometimes alleviate
transmission constraints and allow cheaper real power to be delivered into a load pocket [43].
3.2.3 Reactive power and blackouts

Insu-cient reactive power supply can result in voltage collapse, which has been one of
the reasons for some major blackouts worldwide.
Voltage collapse occurred in the United States in the blackouts of July 2, 1996, and August 10,
1996, on the West Coast. Voltage collapse also factored in the blackouts of December 19,
1978, in France; July 23, 1987, in Tokyo; March 13, 1989, in Québec; August 28, 2003, in
London; September 23, 2003, in Sweden and Denmark; September 28, 2003, in Italy [43].
While the August 2003 blackout in the United States and Canada was not due to a voltage
collapse as that term has been traditionally used, the nal report of the U.S.-Canada Power
System Outage Task Force said that insu-cient reactive power was an issue in the
blackout: dynamic capacitive reactive power supplies were exhausted in the period leading up to the
blackout. The Task Force also recommended strengthening the reactive power and voltage control
practices in all NERC Regions [44].
3.3 Reactive power support as ancillary service

As explained in the preceding section, reactive power needs to be managed in a way to ensure
su-cient amounts are produced to meet demand and so that the electric power system can
operate e-ciently. If reactive power is not properly managed, signicant problems such as
abnormal voltages and system instability can occur. Appropriate regulatory policies are thus
necessary to ensure an adequate supply of reactive power at reasonable cost. The rules for
procuring reactive power can aect whether adequate reactive power supply is available, as well
as whether the supply is procured e-ciently from the most reliable and lowest-cost sources.
In the past vertically integrated framework, the reactive power management had three main ob-
jectives: maintaining a proper voltage level throughout the network under both normal and post-
contingency operating conditions, minimizing the real power losses, and reducing the risk of current
and voltage violations. In this environment both investment and operation costs regarding reactive
power management were included in transmission and ditribution taris and then charged to end
users. The precise knowledge of the power system status and in particular of the generators' avail-
ability allowed the vertically integrated utilities to take the optimal management decisions and to full
all operating requirements. Moreover, the planning and development of reactive resources were
related to that concerning the active ones in the medium-long term.
The restructuring of the electricity industry makes it necessary to revise, from both
technical and economic viewpoint, the methodologies adopted for power system planning,
operation, and control. As regards reactive power service, the general guidelines are still
substantially good, while the provision mechanisms by the System Operators may change.
Currently, most System Operators procure reactive power services from available providers based
on operational experience and expected voltage problems in the system. In real-time, most System
Operators use power ow programs to dispatch reactive power from the already contracted gen-
erators. There are however several issues and concerns associated with the current procurement
practices and pricing policies for reactive power which call for further systematic procedures to have
more e-cient service management and su-cient reactive power support for a more reliable power
system. Some of these issues are technical limitations associated with power system opera-tion,
while others are policy issues related to the rules under which the electricity market operates in a
certain jurisdiction. These issues have to be carefully examined in dening correct provision and
remuneration mechanisms. New policy solutions need to be proposed that t into the new shift of
paradigm of power system operation. In a competitive electricity market, the objective of the System
Operator should be to provide reactive power ancillary services from possible service providers at
the least cost, while ensuring a secure operation of the power system. Appropriate pricing structures
and payment mechanisms are necessary to achieve such an objective.
An overview of the main general issues related to the procurement and management of
reactive power and voltage support services is proposed in the following subsections [43].
3.3.1 Technical issues

Technical issues include the following:
The high losses associated with transferring reactive power require that it should be provided locally. The reactive power procurement
therefore depends on the availability of local reactive power sources. This may result in fewer suppliers generally available to provide the
reactive
power needed at any individual location. These suppliers are likely to have
signicant market power. Moreover, such characteristics imply that reactive power
cannot be treated as a commodity of the same type as real power.

The value of 1 Mvar support with respect to voltage control and system security
varies across the system. The benets of reactive power from generators, with
respect to system security, have to be considered in the provision of reactive power.

It is necessary to consider the eect of reactive power production of a
synchronous genera-tor on its real power generation. In particular situations
reactive power requirements from a generator can only be met at the cost of
reducing its real power output (the so called opportunity costs1).

Spot energy market prices are volatile, and they aect reactive power prices. This will be a
signicant issue if reactive power is managed in the same time frame of real power, since
in this case reactive power prices will be highly aected by the energy market prices.

There are two ways of providing reactive power service: short-term dispatch versus long-
term procurement. If reactive power is provided based on a short-term dispatch, several
issues such as energy market price volatility and the eect of reactive power on real power
and system security will arise. On the other hand, long-term procurement can solve most
of these issues, but it does not consider real-time operating conditions.
3.3.2 Policy issues

Policy issues include the following:

Optimal procurement of reactive power is not always achieved since the System
Operators do not always purchase reactive power at least-cost. In a competitive
market environment, reactive power services should be e-ciently provided from
the most reliable and lowest-cost sources.

Reactive power ancillary services are not provided by considering all available sources;
only reactive power from generators is considered as an ancillary service and is eligible
for nancial compensation. This decreases competition due to a lower number of market
participants, and allows the market power to be exercised by certain service providers.

Poor nancial incentive and discriminatory payments may result in generators not
being equally compensated. Unless reactive power suppliers are encouraged to
participate in fair agreements, they will not be willing to provide these services. This
may impede adequate and su-cient provision of reactive power support, and it may
result in limited number of service providers, leading to an ine-cient market operation.
1
A generator's capacity constraint, which is usually called the loading capability diagram (see Appendix E), plays an
important role in calculating its opportunity cost. The capacity constraint is the restriction on the operation of a
generator, which is limited by the synchronous generator armature current limit, the eld current limit, and the
underexcitation limit. Because of these limits, the production of reactive power may prevent some other alternative
capacity usages. The highest value of the alternative capacity usage is dened as the opportunity cost of reactive
power. Assume that the capacity of a generator is used only for producing P and Q and the markets for buying and
selling P and Q are always available. According to the denition of opportunity cost, the value of the alternative capacity
usage for Q is the prot of P that can not be achieved by producing Q [45].

There is a lack of transparency and consistency in planning and procurement process for
reactive power services. This may result in an ine-cient supply of reactive power support,
since reactive power needs and reserves are not clearly dened by existing standards.

Interconnecting standards are assumed to be insensitive to local needs, i. e. without
consid-ering that reactive power needs may vary from one location to another.
3.3.3 A challenge for System Operator and Regulatory Authority

3.3.3.1 Optimal provision for reactive power service
As already explained, in a liberalised electricity market framework the System Operator has to
ensure the same standards of quality and security guaranteed by the past vertically integrated
utilities, but it may have di-culties in meeting these requirements because electricity generation and
distribution do not fall under its competence any longer. This situation is even more compli-cated
with regard to voltage control, considering the di-culties of reactive power to be conveyed over long
distances, the variety of resources and equipments that can be exploited to provide the reactive
power service, 2 and the resulting di-culties of their well-coordinated management.
Reactive power provision by the System Operator should be achieved in an optimal manner, and
the choice of an appropriate optimization criterion is essential for the development of competitive
reactive power provision mechanisms. But: what is the best optimization criterion to be adopted by
the System Operator? What is the optimization objective to determine the system reactive power
schedules? Should it be system loss minimization, as has been the usual practice, or should it be
system security maximization or reactive power cost minimization?
3.3.3.2 The eect of reactive power on real power and system security
The main function of a synchronous generator is to generate real power to meet the
system demand. Under critical conditions, the System Operator may request or instruct a
generator to increase its reactive power output, which may require a reduction in its real
power production. The reactive power capacity of a synchronous generator is determined
by its capability curve, representing its ability to simultaneously produce real power and
generate/absorb reactive power (Figure 3.1). The boundary of the feasible operating
region of the generator is formed by the intersection of four physical limiting relationships:
the minimum loading, the eld current (eld heating limit), the armature current (armature
heating limit), and the under-excitation of the generator (under-excitation limit) [46].
A possible partitioning of the area contained by the generator capability curve into
three regions to represent specic operation regimes of the generator has been
proposed in [47]. The three-region model consists of:
1. the obligation to serve region within the capability curve area delimited by the
regulatorily mandated constraints, such as lead/lag power factor or reactive
power limits, under which service is provided;
2. the boundary region specied by the capability curve with the operation of the
generator at its reactive power limits;
2
See Appendix
E.
Figure 3.1: Example of a synchronous generator loading capability diagram
3. the remaining region in the area contained by the capability curve and not
belonging to either of the two regions above.
Operation in the obligation to serve region is not eligible for any additional payment. The
operation in the boundary region may receive payment to compensate for the reduction in
the real power generation so as to allow the required change in the reactive power. Such a
change incurs a loss of opportunity to generate real power and should be, therefore,
eligible for opportunity cost payments for this loss [48]. So any reactive power generation
requested by the System Operator in the boundary region will require a decrease in the
real power generation from the already dispatched levels. Such an eect on real power
dispatch should be considered when modeling the reactive power dispatch problem.
The re-scheduling in real power generation associated with an increase in the reactive power
re-quirements may result in an insecure operation of the power system. Hence, the System
Operator needs to check the technical feasibility of the resulting solution after reactive power
dispatch pro-cedures are completed. Therefore, in order to ensure a reliable and secure
system operation, it is important to incorporate system security in the reactive power provision
procedures by including appropriate transmission security constraints, and to consider the eect
of reactive power dis-patch on real power dispatch and system security. Transmission security
constraints are typically represented by voltage, thermal, and stability limits.
3.3.3.3 Reactive power management: dispatch versus procurement
Reactive power provision can possibly be managed as a short-term provision in which it is

dis-patched from available generators based on real-time system operating conditions. It
may be also managed as a seasonal provision in which it is procured based on long-term
agreements between the System Operator and the service providers. If reactive power is
managed concurrently with the energy market clearing process, some problems may arise
such as price volatility and the eect of reactive power on real power and system security.
Currently, most System Operators sign long-term contracts with reactive power service providers,
based on operational experience and knowledge of the system and the expected voltage problems.
In real-time, most System Operators run power ow programs to determine the required reactive
power dispatch levels from contracted providers. The System Operator has to check if the solution
of the power ow is not violating any of the security limits. In the case when generators are operating
in the opportunity region, where they are required to back-up their real power generation to meet the
reactive power requirements, the System Operator needs to check if the resulting operating point
after re-scheduling of real power is secure or not.
3.3.3.4 Reactive power remuneration schemes
In a competitive market environment, if reactive power service providers are not properly compen-
sated for their service, they will not have enough incentive to provide the required reactive power
support, which will aect the power system operation and security. An important issue that arises with
regard to reactive power markets is then the choice of an appropriate remuneration mecha-nism.
Should it be a market-based auction mechanism where the suppliers provide their reactive power
bids to the System Operator, which in turn determines the best reactive power price using an
appropriate objective function? If so, should it then be a uniform price market for reactive power with
a single reactive power price for the whole system, or a zonal level reactive power auction market
where the system is divided into zones, and separate reactive power prices are determined for each
zone? Should a Locational Marginal Price (LMP) market, in which reactive power price varies
across each bus, be used? If there is no auction market, then reactive power payments could be set
on a contractual basis, with the System Operator entering into bilateral agreements with the service
providers and signing long-term contracts for the required reactive power services.
3.3.3.5 Energy price volatility
Energy prices can be highly volatile under certain system conditions, such as demand
spikes or outages. In a short-term operational time-frame, volatile energy market
conditions might have an impact on reactive power procurement and dispatch procedures.
3.3.3.6 Reactive market power
One of the primary obstacles to the implementation of a competitive market for reactive power is the
possibility of market power arising because of the limited number of reactive power service
providers at a given location. Furthermore, reactive power is a local service, and so it must be
procured and provided as close to the demand buses as possible because of the technical issues
associated with transporting reactive power over long distances. Thus in a reactive power market, it
is plausible that some well-located suppliers may try to exercise market power by submitting
excessively high price oers or by withholding reactive power supply in an attempt to

increase the reactive power market price to their own advantage [49].
3.4 Reactive power management review

Reactive power management and payment mechanisms dier from one electricity market to
an-other, and no uniform structure or design has yet dened. There is no fully developed
structure for competition or pricing of reactive power services in any system. Moreover,
there is no unied framework, universally acceptable, for reactive power management. In
some cases the pricing is based on xed contractual payments, and in other cases based
on gross system usage (embedded cost), while in other markets there is no mechanism
for payments. Even the classication of the obligatory reactive power requirements does
not follow any well-dened criterion, apart from the operator's experience [43].
3.4.1 Reactive power service in dierent deregulated markets

While in current deregulated power systems, provision of real power is fully competitive,
no fully competitive market-approach to reactive power provision exists. It means that the
reactive power service is based on a regulated provision and not a reactive power.
The System Operator generally xes mandatory requirements for reactive supply by
generators, which can be summarized as follows:

the generators shall keep power factor to be equal to a certain value: the mandatory reactive
power production (or consumption) decreases according to the reduction of real power;

the generators shall deliver (or absorb) at least a minimum amount Qmin of reactive power;

the generators shall maintain voltage level at delivery points to be equal to a certain value;

a reactive power thresold is dened as a percentage of the maximum producible
(or consum-able) according to the capability curve.
Moreover, if the System Operator needs an additional reactive supply (or

consumption) to maintain the security standards, it can:

impose the generator to supply (or consume) this additional amount according to its capa-
bility curve, while taking into account and respecting the concept of opportunity cost;

allow the generator to supply or not this additional amount. In case of participation, an
economic agreement between the System Operator and the producer is stipulated.
3.4.1.1 North America
Currently, according to NERC's Operating Policy 10 [50], only synchronous generators

are com-pensated for reactive power provision.
The New York ISO (NYISO) uses an embedded cost based pricing to compensate generators for their
reactive power services, and it also imposes a penalty for failing to provide reactive power. Generators
are also compensated for their lost opportunity costs if they are required to produce reactive power by
backing down their real power output [51].
Such opportunity cost payments also exist in PJM Interconnection [52] and California ISO (CAISO).
Provision of reactive power services in the California system is based on long-term contracts be-
tween CAISO and reliable must-run generators; generators are mandated to provide reactive power
within a power factor range 0.9 lagging to 0.95 leading. Beyond these limits, the generators are paid
for their reactive power including a lost opportunity cost payment [53].
The Independent Electric System Operator (IESO) in Ontario, Canada, requires generators to
operate within a power factor range of 0.9 lagging to 0.95 leading and within a +/-5% range of
its rated terminal voltage. The IESO signs contracts with generators for reactive power support
and voltage control, and generators are paid for the incremental cost of energy loss in the
windings due to the increased reactive power generation. The generators are also paid if they
are required to generate reactive power levels that aect their real power dispatch, receiving an
opportunity cost payment at the energy market clearing price for any power not generated [54].
3.4.1.2 Europe
In the United Kingdom, the TSO National Grid Electricity Transmission (NGET) invites half-
yearly tenders for both obligatory reactive power services which correspond to the base
reactive power that each generator is required to provide, and enhanced reactive power
services for gen-erators with excess reactive power capabilities. There are two payment
mechanisms: a default payment agreement, where both the generator and NGET enter
into an agreement for service provision and payments, and a market-based agreement,
where generators submit their reactive power bids to the NGET [55].
Sweden follows a policy wherein reactive power is supplied by generators on a mandatory
basis and without any nancial compensation. The goal is to keep reactive power ow on the
transmission system close to zero, especially at certain interfaces. Some large generators
are seldom used for voltage control and are operated at a constant reactive power output.
Hydro and thermal units are required to maintain a capability to inject reactive power of
one third the amount of real power injection (a power factor of approximately 0.90).
Also in Norway reactive power is provided by generators on a mandatory basis and without any
nancial compensation: all generators is required to supply reactive power within a power factor
range of 0.93 lagging to 0.98 leading. Additional reactive power supply is individually imposed
to generators. The remuneration of these additional provisions is yearly negotiated by the
System Operator and the producers' representatives.
In the Netherlands, individual network companies have to provide for their own
reactive power, usually through bilateral contracts with local generators, who are only
paid for the reactive capacity but not for reactive energy [56].
In Spain the voltage regulation service is provided by both generators (with a net power higher than
30 MW) and consumers (> 15 MW). There are a compulsory service, which has not any nancial
compensation, and an optional one. As regards generators, they must have a minimum margin of
reactive power at cos = 0:989 (both lagging and leading), equal to 15% of the maximum real power of
the group. Consumers are required to full some obligations depending on the time band: they shall
consume reactive power with cos 0:95 during peak hours, while they are
not allowed to inject reactive power into the grid during o-peak hours. Besides the
compulsory service, generators and consumers can oer additional reactive power
resources, that are instead remunerated [57].
3.4.2 Literature on reactive power pricing and management

Traditionally, reactive power dispatch has always been viewed by researchers as a loss minimization
problem, subject to various system constraints such as nodal real and reactive power balance, bus
voltage limits, and power generation limits [58-61]. Another approach has been to dispatch reactive power
with the objective of maximizing the system loadability in order to minimize the risk of voltage collapse
[62, 63]. Furthermore, multi-objective optimization models have also been proposed for the reactive
power dispatch problem. In these models, reactive power is dispatched to achieve other objectives, in
addition to the traditional loss minimization, such as maximizing voltage stability margin [64], or
minimizing the voltage and transformer taps deviation [65].
Researchers have been working at reactive power pricing and management in the
context of the new operating paradigms in competitive electricity markets. Both
technical and economic issues associated with pricing of reactive power, along with its
optimal provision, have received signicant attention.
Several approaches have been reported in the literature for identifying and analysing the dierent
cost components associated with reactive power production from synchronous generators. In [45]
Lamont and Fu have provided a comprehensive analysis of the various economic costs of reactive
support from both generation and transmission sources. The cost of reactive support has been
shared in explicit and implicit costs: the former are related to the capital cost of the facilities and to
the operating cost of production, while the latter refer to the Opportunity Costs (OCs).
et al
Luiz da Silva have discussed in [66] the practical issues related to the denition of a suitable
cost structure for reactive power production, as well as the development of appropriate payment
mechanisms for reactive power providers. Costs of reactive power production are divided into xed
capital costs and variable costs. A detailed analysis have been carried out for dierent variable costs
associated with reactive power production from various sources, including generators, synchronous
compensators, static compensators, and shunts capacitors. The authors have proposed that
payments for generators operating as synchronous compensators should be determined based on
et al
the operating time and real power consumption, rather than on reactive power production or
absorption. They also have argued that certain reactive power sources, such as capacitors and on-
load tap changers, should be considered as part of the transmission network and not
as ancillary services' providers. Gross have examined in [48] the variable costs of reactive
power production/absorption by a generator, identifying the most dominant cost component,

which is determined as the foregone prot of a generator in the real power market consequent to
the obligation to reduce the real power sales for the provision of additional reactive power.
Reactive power pricing policies have been typically based on power factor penalties.
With the de-velopment of real-time or spot pricing theory, there has been signicant
interest in their application in the context of competitive electricity markets.
Baughman and Siddiqi have introduced real-time pricing for reactive power in [67], based on
the hourly marginal costs of providing real and reactive power at a given bus. These marginal
costs, which correspond to the added operating expense incurred by the utility to serve an
incremental demand, are obtained by solving a modied optimal power ow (OPF) that minimizes
the total generation cost subject to operation constraints that include load ow equations, real
and reactive generation limits, bus voltage limits, and transmission system limits.
In [68] Hao and Papalexopoulos have presented two pricing methods based on reactive power unit
cost measure. In the rst structure, reactive power production limits are determined by perfor-
mance requirements and standards; in this structure, penalties are proposed for service
providers that violate these performance standards, and credits are given for providing extra
reactive power generation beyond the specied standards. The second structure is based on a
local reactive power concept, where the Indipendent System Operator (ISO) procures reactive
power services from gen-erators based on the cost of their reactive power capacity, and then
recovers these payments from load customers according to their demand.
The model proposed by El-Keib and Ma in [69] is based on the calculation of the Short Run
Marginal Costs (SRMCs) by means of a decoupled OPF algorithm: one related to the real sub-
problem, the other related to the reactive sub-problem. In particular, the reactive power
optimisa-tion provides the calculation of the reactive marginal costs, considering the additional
real power generating cost for an increase of the reactive power demand: in this way, also the
synchronous generators operating inside their capability limits are compensated.
In [70], pertinent to the English market, the authors have presented a method for the simulation
and analysis of the reactive power market based on combined capacity and energy payments.
The authors of [71] have focused on the Spanish electric system. The reactive support is
divided in two dierent services: the reactive energy market and the reactive capacity market.
All these papers are based on the marginal cost theory, supposing that marginal cost
can recover all the costs involved to produce, transport, and deliver reactive power.
An innovative approach for pricing the reactive power ancillary service is presented in [72]. A two-
step approach is proposed. First of all the TSO determines the marginal benet of each reactive bid
from an OPF problem, whose objective is to minimize the system transmission losses subject to the
operational constraints. Then the marginal benets are included in a composite objective function, the
Societal Advantage Function (SAF), together with the price bid oers of the producers. The SAF is
maximized, seeking contribution to the system performance (in terms of loss reduction) from
reactive power providers with lowest possible cost.
A rst attempt to dene the impact of the existence of a SVR (Secundary Voltage Regulation)
scheme in the EHV system on the reactive pricing structure can be found in [73].
In [47] Zhong and Bhattacharya set up a market-approach in which generators submit bids for their
reactive support and a uniform market price is determined through an auction. Generators submit
their bid for four dierent types of capacities, one of which is the operating range where Lost
Opportunity Costs (LOCs) are imposed on the generator and another is for the absorption
component. A market price is then determined for each separate component. A composite objective
function containing three dierently weighted terms is minimized. The ISO performs his choice
balancing three dierent objectives: minimum cost of reactive power provision, losses minimization
and minimum deviation from the contracted transactions. This approach has been extended by
et al
Zhong in [74] by using the concept of voltage control areas to determine a zonal market price to
reduce the possibilities of market power exploitation by generators with strong market position.
3.4.3 Possible policy solutions

3.4.3.1 Decoupling of real and reactive power
On the basis of the discussions in section 3.3, and in particular considering the problems that arise
when both real and reactive power are simultaneously managed and priced by the System
Operator, a possible solution is to decouple these two markets from each other. Decoupling of real
and reactive power markets is possible by placing them in two entirely di erent operating time
frames. This methodology has been suggested in [69, 75]. Such a decoupling implies
that the OPF problem can be separated into two sub-problems. The real power sub-
problem essentially provides the real power dispatch and prices in real-time based on
a cost minimization (or social welfare maximization) market settlement model. The
reactive power sub-problem, operating on dierent time frames, provides reactive
power contracts, prices, and dispatch levels based on appropriate optimization criteria.
3.4.3.2 Zonal reactive power management
Given the localized nature of reactive power and the common practices amongst most electric
utilities in regards to splitting the whole system into zones or voltage control areas, zonal reactive
power management and pricing might be an appropriate approach. In the case of a system-wide
uniform price, market ine-ciencies resulting from market power being exercised by some reactive
power service providers, anywhere in the system, will aect all other providers in the system. Zonal
reactive power pricing, on the other hand, helps isolate and conne any existing market ine -ciencies
within the zone. These market ine-ciencies may arise from some service providers trying to exercise
market power by increasing their reactive power price oers. In terms of service provision, zonal
reactive power management allows for having additional reactive power reserves for each zone; this
reserve can be called upon by the System Operator in emergency cases associated with severe
contingencies in the system. In general, zonal reactive power management can be achieved by
splitting the system into dierent voltage control areas [76].
3.4.3.3 Alternative sources of reactive power supply
One of the main challenges associated with reactive power provision is that, so far, only reactive
power support from synchronous generators has been considered as an ancillary service and
eligible for nancial compensation. With a more liberal reactive power ancillary service provision
struc-ture, there would be more competition due to an increased number of providers. It is important
to examine how other reactive power providers, such as capacitor banks and FACTS controllers,
could participate in the reactive power ancillary service markets to help develop a fully competitive
reactive power market. This particular issue is not studied in this thesis, since the characteristics of
these reactive power resources make them essentially dierent from generators; hence, appropriate
policies will be required to determine how these resources can be properly compensated for pro-
viding reactive power as an ancillary service. In this thesis, only reactive power from synchronous
generators is considered as an ancillary service [49].
3.5 Architecture of voltage control system

The architecture of the voltage control system can be fully centralized or decentralized or hier-
archical. Here we will describe in detail only the latter scheme, since it is the voltage regulation
structure set up for the Italian electric system by its past monopolistic utility (ENEL).
3.5.1 Hierarchical voltage control system

The voltage control system can be organized into a three-level hierarchy [77, 78]. In short:
1. Primary voltage and reactive power control level.

It consists in automatic actions on individual or a limited number of power system

equipment based upon local measurements. It is a local automatic control that maintains
the voltage at a given bus (at the stator in the case of a generating unit) at its set-point.
Automatic voltage regulators (AVRs) full this task for generating units. Other controllable
devices, such as static voltage compensators, can also participate in this primary control.
It faces up to local perturbations such as short circuits close to generating units. The
typical response time scale is between a few milliseconds up to about one minute.
2. Secondary voltage and reactive power control level.

It consists in coordinated actions of control resources within a dened part/area of
the power system aimed at maintaining system security. It is a centralized
automatic control that coordinates the actions of local regulators in order to
manage the injection of reactive power within a regional voltage zone. The typical
response time scale is between one minute and up to a few minutes.
3. Tertiary voltage and reactive power control level.

It consists in coordinated global economy and/or security optimization on utility,
pool, or country levels based upon real-time measurements. The typical
response time scale is around 10 minutes or longer.
Hierarchical systems based on network area subdivision and automatic coordination of reactive
power resources were rst studied in Europe for achieving network voltage control. These innova-tive
solutions, named Coordinated Voltage Regulation (CVR) or Secondary and Tertiary Voltage
Regulations (SVR and TVR), depending on their hierarchical level, have been studied in Italy [79-
81], France [82, 83], Belgium [84, 85], and Spain [86, 87]. Some of them operate in real systems
and are extended at the national level. As a result of changes in the organization of European
utilities and the resulting energy markets' deregulation, hierarchical voltage control systems are
increasingly being appreciated and reinforced. In fact, system operators recognize that SVR and
TVR permit both simplication of automatic control of overall transmission network voltages and
recognition of the contributions of dierent participants to the voltage ancillary service.
Progress and trends in transmission network voltage control require major development and inno-
vation through use of simple, eective, automatic control systems, managed and supervised directly
by system operators. Moreover, because voltage control is prevalently a local problem, potential
solutions must consider automatic coordination of local reactive power resources, primarily those of
generators and compensators but also shunt capacitors and reactors, OLTCs, SVCs, and STAT-
COMs. For this reason, the goals (quality and security improvements in network operation) of
voltage ancillary service can be pursued through a decentralized voltage control system, by in-
troducing local coordination in each area/region of the power system. Such coordination requires
exchange of data and signals between the regional dispatcher and local plants/substations: the
more data are exchanged in real-time, on the basis of power system dynamics, the more the volt-
age control system can improve performance and eectiveness. The benets of network voltage
control in terms of grid e-ciency, on the other hand, are more strongly linked with inter-area
coordination, requiring eective exchange of data and signals among regional dispatchers and the
central/national system operator. In particular, the exchange of measurements with the neigh-
bouring utilities (e. g. boundary bus voltages and tie-line reactive power ows), as well as the
coordination of mutual control actions, are very important for reducing system losses. The on-line
and real-time monitoring of actual EHV control system performance also represents a
challeng-ing opportunity for indubitable correct recognition of power plants'
contributions to the voltage service, in the framework of energy sector liberalization
and ancillary market competition. The main reasons supporting coordinated automatic
real-time voltage regulation can therefore be summarized as follows [88]:

the quality of power system operation is improved, in terms of reduced variation
around the dened voltages prole across the overall transmission network;

the security of power system operation is enhanced, in terms of reactive power
reserves kept available by generating units for dealing with emergency conditions;

the transfer capability of power system is improved, in terms of increased
transmissible real power levels, with reduced voltage instability and collapse risks;

the e-ciency of power system operation is enhanced, in terms of minimization of real
power losses, reduction of reactive ows and better exploitation of reactive resources;

the controllability and measurability of voltage ancillary service is simplied, in
terms of denition of functional requirements and performance monitoring criteria.
3.5.1.1 Basic SVR and TVR concepts
The basic concepts of SVR are summarized to permit understanding of the proposed
control system's structure, performance, and advantages:

the idea of automatic real-time control of hundreds of transmission bus voltages is
too com-plex, very critical, not reliable, and therefore unrealistic and uneconomical;

the generating units' reactive power is, obviously, the main resource already
available in the eld, low-cost, and simple to control for network voltage support;

a realistic simple voltage control system should consider the dominant buses only (a
small amount), thus allowing a sub-optimal but feasible and reliable control solution;

in order to easily realize the dominant bus (pilot node) idea we call joint-buses those
having high electrical coupling to form a control area with voltages close to each other;

the control structure, based on the subdivision of the grid into several control areas, auto-
matically and, as much as possible, independently regulates each area pilot node voltage;

the control resource is essentially based on the reactive powers of the largest generating
units in the area (control plants), which mainly inuence the local pilot node voltage.
The basic idea of TVR comes from the need to increase the system operating security
and e-ciency through centralized coordination of the decentralized SVR structure:

the pilot nodes' voltage set-points must be adequately updated and coordinated
with slower dynamics than SVR, considering the actual condition of the overall
grid and avoiding useless and conicting inter-area control eorts;
the pilot nodes' voltage set-points can be computed and updated in real-time, considering the global control system
structure and its real-time measurements;
Figure 3.2: Hierarchical structure for transmission network voltage control

the pilot node' voltage set-points have to be optimized to minimize grid losses
while still preserving control margins.
It is necessary to point out that, notwithstanding the goal of minimizing control system complexity,
the eort involved in achieving an eective control system is in any case considerable when a large
transmission network is involved, as conrmed by past experience and existing applications. On one
hand, a new power plant apparatus is needed to control the reactive power production of generating
units, as well as of synchronous compensators, according to the local bus-bar or remote pilot node
voltage regulator and taking into account the instantaneous available capability of the plant
generators. On the other hand, a specic regional dispatcher regulator is necessary to automatically
maintain pilot node voltages at their scheduled values, controlling the new power plant apparatus
via rapid telecommunications, turning on/o reactor banks and shunt capacitors, and ordering OLTCs
and FACTS controller set-points. Lastly, a new voltage and reactive power optimizing regulator is
required at the national/utility control level, to coordinate and update all the pilot node voltage set-
points on-line and in real-time (Figure 3.2) [88].
3.6 Reactive power service in Italy

3.6.1 Current regulatory framework in Italy
This subsection briey introduces the current legislative, regulatory, and technical
framework with respect to voltage control and to reactive requirements for producers
and consumers connected to the Italian grid. Most relevant regulatory orders and
technical standards are mentioned in Figure 3.3.
According to the grid code [8], conventional (i. e. thermal and hydro) power plants shall be able to
operate at over-excitation power factor 0.85 or 0.9 (the value depends on the size and type of
generator) and at under-excitation power factor 0.95. All generating units connected to the
transmission and sub-transmission grids shall contribute to the primary voltage control, that is, the
machines have an automatic voltage regulator and simply regulate the voltage on the generator
Figure 3.3: Italian regulation for voltage control and reactive exchanges
bus-bars.
Generating units below 10 MVA can be allowed to provide xed power factors. It is
envisaged that, in the future, generators unable to provide primary voltage control will
have to pay a fee for it. A complex secondary voltage regulation, including a regulator of
reactive power and voltage in the power plants and the communication systems with the
regional voltage regulator, is installed on all generators and is coordinated by the Italian
National Control Center with the objective of controlling voltages in some selected network
buses (called pilot nodes) based on the denition of network control areas. The choice of
generators' participating to SVR depends on their capabilities and system characteristics.
For generating units connected to medium voltage (MV) grids, the standard of Italian
Electrotech-nical Committee CEI 0-16 [89] states that the reactive injection/withdrawal
shall allow to operate medium and low voltage (LV) grids within their nominal voltage
+/- 10%. Therefore it shall be agreed with the local distribution system operator (DSO)
and be ruled within the individual contract of connection.
For consumers and DSOs, the regulatory order 348/07 (electricity tari regulation for the period
2008-2011) [90] introduced a mandatory framework for payments related to excess reactive
energy withdrawals. All consumers with contractual power higher than 16.5 kW have to pay in
case their average monthly reactive consumption is higher than 50% of their average monthly
active consumption. In case their power factor is below 0.8 (reactive consumption > 75%), an
increase of payments applies as described in Table 3.1. In case the consumer is equipped with
a meter allowing to read hourly withdrawals, the payments are set to zero in light load hours.
The Italian TSO applies the payments of Table 3.1 in case of excess reactive withdrawals at
the connection points with DSOs (except than in light load hours) and takes into account such
payments for dening the remuneration of dispatching resources. Further, according to the grid
Table 3.1: Payments by Italian consumers for excess withdrawal of reactive energy
code, the TSO can impose to DSOs the power factor in their connection points for
voltage quality and losses reasons. Similarly, DSOs apply the same payments to
interconnected DSOs in case of excess reactive withdrawals (except than in light load
hours). DSOs have to transfer the payments which they collected from grid users and
interconnected DSOs to a fund for promotion of energy e-ciency measures.
The denition of the economic value of payments is based on a Decree of Interministerial Committee
on Prices of December 1993, CIP 15/93 [91]. Before the regulatory order 348/07, the application of
payments for excess reactive withdrawals was optional for DSOs, which however had to take into
account their amounts within the cap for distribution revenues (tari options were subject to
regulatory approval). In the consultation process towards the third regulatory period 2008-2011, the
Italian Regulatory Authority explicitly stated the objective of encouraging consumers to prevent
signicant voltage drops in distribution grids and contribute reducing grid losses by means of
mandatory reactive payments. Stakeholders were consulted on the opportunity to introduce a
mandatory scheme and were invited to suggest how to size the economic value of payments. Six
respondents out of six agreed with the opportunity to implement a mandatory framework, whereas
there was less consensus on the denition of values. Indeed, one respondent suggested to use the
values dened by CIP 15/93, one respondent to slightly modify CIP 15/93 values for sake of
simplicity, one respondent to have increasing payments for lower power factors, one respondent to
consider incentive possibilities for consumers with their power factor signicantly higher than 0.9, one
respondent to size the payment referring to capital expenditures for compensating equipment,
taking into account a proper pay-back period [92]. The Italian Regulatory Authority started, with the
regulatory order Electricity 48/09 issued in April 2009, the process to review regulation of reactive
energy transits in transmission and distribution grids.
The ultimate aspect related to reactive energy injections and withdrawals is the voltage prole in
electricity grids, i. e. the magnitude of voltage provided to customers at all voltage levels. In Europe,
the most important standard regarding voltage characteristics of electricity supplied by public
distribution networks is EN 50160 issued by CENELEC (Comité Européen de Normalisation
Électrotechnique) [93]. It denes, describes, and species the main characteristics of the voltage at a
network user's supply terminals in networks below 35 kV. As for supply voltage variation limits, EN
50160 states that under normal operating conditions, during each period of one week, 95% of the 10
minutes root mean square values of the supply voltage shall be within the range of contractual
voltage +/- 10%. EN 50160 is currently under revision after three years of cooperation between
CEER (Council of European Energy Regulators) and CENELEC. In Italy, minimum and maximum
voltages for transmission and sub-transmission are de ned yearly, according to provisions in the
quality chapter of grid code. For 380 kV nominal voltage, they are 375 kV-415 kV to be
fullled 95% of time and 360 kV-420 kV to be fullled 100% of time in normal and alert security state.
Further, the Italian Regulatory Authority introduced by its order 333/07 (electricity quality regulation
for the period 2008-2011) a guaranteed quality standard for checking voltage magnitude and supply
voltage variations by the involved DSO upon request of a LV or MV grid user.
3.6.2 Reactive power service by generators

In the Italian power system in the '80s ENEL, the state-owned vertically integrated
utility in force up to 1999, set up a hierarchical structure for network voltage control
[79], which is presently updated, enlarged, and managed by TERNA, the current
Italian Transmission System Operator. According to this, the grid code [8] denes two
dierent reactive power services, as anticipated in the preceding subsection:
1. reactive resources for Primary Voltage Regulation (PVR);
2. reactive resources for Secondary Voltage Regulation (SVR).
The reactive power support for primary voltage regulation is divided into:

reactive power reserve for primary voltage control of the single generation unit:
it consists in controlling the reactive power production of a generation unit by an
automatic regulation device (AVR - Automatic Voltage Regulator 3) capable of
modulating the reactive power delivered by the group considering the variation of
the voltage magnitude at its ter-minals with respect to a certain reference value.
Only generating units below 10 MVA can be allowed to provide xed reactive
power amounts or power factors, subject to the TSO agreement.

reactive power reserve for primary voltage control on the high-side bus-bar of a power
plant: it consists in subjecting the reactive power production of all groups in a power plant
to an automatic regulation device (power plant voltage and reactive power regulator 4) that
is able to modulate the reactive power delivered by each generation unit based on the
voltage variations on the high-side bus-bar of the power plant with respect to a suitable
daily voltage trend or an operator-dened set-point. All power plants with at least one
generating unit above 100 MVA are required to provide this service.
The primary voltage control is a mandatory service, without any nancial compensation.
The reactive power support for secondary voltage regulation consists in controlling the reactive
power production of all groups in a power plant by a centralized automatic regulation device capable
of modulating the reactive power delivered by each generating unit based on the voltage variations
at some buses selected by the TSO and called pilot nodes. The reactive power regulation is made
according to the reactive level received by a Regional Voltage Regulator (RVR). 5
The secondary voltage regulation is now a voluntary service. Therefore, it is important to analyse
possible rules and nancial compensations related to such voltage regulation service, as well as their
consequences on the performances provided by this structure in a deregulated market.
3
In Italian it is called RAT - Regolatore Automatico di Tensione.
4
In Italian it is called SART - Sistema Automatico per la Regolazione della Tensione di centrale. It can operate in two
dierent control modes: local operation for primary voltage control on the high-side bus-bar of a power plant, and
telecontrol for secondary voltage regulation.
5
In Italian it is called RRT - Regolatore Regionale di Tensione.
3.6.3 The Italian network voltage control system
The Italian hierarchical voltage control system regulates the voltages of the main EHV buses
(pilot nodes) in a closed loop through real-time control of the reactive resources which most
inuence these buses. This permits secure transmission network operation, very close to the
highest voltage limits, through rapid control of the main generators (control plants), coordinated
by a reactive power level within the same grid portion (control area) and automatically forced to
their limits only when needed. The Regional Voltage Regulators (RVRs) close the control loops
of the pilot node voltages, providing each area with a specic reactive power level which controls
the local power plants' voltage and reactive power regulators (named SART). In turn, the SART
closes the reactive power control loops of the plant units, directly acting on the set-points of the
generators' automatic voltage regulators (AVRs). RVR also controls capacitor banks, shunt
reactors, OLTCs, and SVCs to avoid saturation of area generators. AVR rapid control is
referred to as Primary Voltage Regulation (PVR). The combination of SART [94] and RVR [95]
implements the SVR. At the highest hierarchical control level, a Tertiary Voltage Regulator
(TVR) coordinates the RVRs in a real-time closed loop.
It establishes, on the basis of the actual eld measurements, the current pilot node voltages
which achieve the minimum feasible grid losses, by slow RVR set-point correction, keeping
the system under control at all times. To achieve this aim, an Optimal Reactive Power Flow
(ORPF) for Losses Minimization Control (LMC) computes, in short (the day ahead) or very
short (minutes ahead) terms, the forecasted optimal voltages and reactive levels, starting
from the foreseen/current state estimation. TVR therefore minimizes the dierences
between the actual eld measurements and the optimal forecasted references. This
computed compromise represents the maximum tenable voltages plan at any instant. The
combination of TVR [96, 97] and LMC [98, 99] forms the National Voltage Regulator
(NVR), which so links ORPF forecasting with real-time optimization of SVR set-points.
The hierarchical voltage control system has dierent operation modes, according to its
implemen-tation progresses, maintenance interventions and transient or persistent failures:

without plant telecommunications, or when the RVR is not operating, SART
automatically regulates the local EHV bus voltage (high-side voltage regulation),
according to dened daily trends or the plant operator's voltage set-points, agreed
by phone with the regional dispatcher;

without system operator's telecommunications or when TVR is not operating, the
RVR autonomously regulates the pilot node voltages of its controlled areas,
according to stored daily trends or the regional dispatcher's chosen set-points,
agreed by phone coordination with national control center;

when the LMC is not operating, the TVR autonomously coordinates the RVRs,
assuming, as a reference for the optimization of pilot node voltages and reactive
power margins, the available long term forecasted optimal plan or the national
control center operator's manual reference.
The following subsection will consider one of the basic issues for designing the voltage control system.
Other technical characteristics are described in detail in Appendix E.
3.6.3.1 Selection of pilot nodes, control areas, and control plants
The three hierarchical levels consist of overlapped closed-loop controls, whose

coordination in space and time requires a careful design of their stability and dynamics
to achieve adequate performance even when faced with contingencies. The design
starting point requires proper subdivision of the overall grid into control areas around
the selected pilot nodes, and correct choice of the most appropriate control plants.
The selection of pilot nodes is based on the intuitive idea that such buses must be chosen among
the strongest ones, able to impose voltages on the other electrically close buses. The design crite-
ria, based on short-circuit capacities and sensitivity matrix computations, also requires electrical
coupling between pilot nodes to be su-ciently low to avoid possible problems of dynamic inter-action
between secondary control loops. With this constraint, in fact, excessive reactive power exchanges
among adjacent control areas, determined by even slight dierences between the pilot node voltages
imposed by the regulating system, are basically prevented. If network operational requirements
condition pilot node selection by determining excessive electrical coupling between control areas,
the secondary control law should de-couple the dynamic interactions between con-trol loops. The
analytic procedure of selection of pilot nodes consists of a successive re-ordering of the sensitivity
matrix, expressing the dependence of the grid bus voltages on reactive power injections, with
primary voltage regulation operating. The method assumes the load or generation bus, having the
strongest short-circuit capacity, as the pilot node 1. All buses with the highest coupling coe-cient with
pilot node 1 are assumed belonging to control area 1 and excluded from subsequent pilot node
choices. This procedure, progressively applied, identies the other pilot nodes which are the
strongest of the remaining buses and therefore gradually weaker, until the procedure stops due to
insu-cient short-circuit capacity.
The choice of control plants is based on the simple criterion that they must operate in the control
area and have the largest reactive power capability and the highest electrical coupling with the
selected pilot node. Selection of control plants also permits advance recognition of control areas with
consistent reactive power resources, as well as those where the reactive power reserves are critical
and pilot node voltage regulation could more easily reach saturation. The analytic proce-dure for the
choice of control plants requires successive re-organization of the sensitivity matrix, expressing the
dependence of the pilot node voltages on the reactive power injections by generators. The method
assumes all the generators belonging to the control area i and having their highest
coe-cient placed in the pilot node i row, as potential control plants i. All potential plants
with the highest product of sensitivity coe-cient by rated reactive power capability are
denitely assumed as control plant i.
These simple methods are not computationally heavy and give satisfactory results, once some
threshold values have been rened, taking particular network characteristics into account.
For instance, accepting a higher electrical coupling increases the number of pilot nodes but also
requires more complex control laws to deal with closed-loop interaction and dynamic instability risks.
Moreover, frequent re-selection of pilot nodes, even in the case of small network changes, is
required. On the contrary, excessively low electrical coupling reduces the number of pilot nodes and
signicantly de-couples their control loops, but at the same time worsens voltage quality. Similarly,
accepting excessively low products of sensitivity coe-cients by rated reactive powers increases the
number of control plants and the corresponding reserve margins, but could require more unnecessary
control infrastructures to permit the participation and coordination of small
generators.
The subdivision of the whole system into control areas must be robust and conservative, to prevent
control system reconguration from becoming too frequent in response to minor network changes.
Relevant structural changes, however, must be analysed to determine their impact on pilot nodes,
control areas and control plant selection, and to adequately re-tune regulation parameters [88].
3.7 Optimal Reactive Power Flow program

As explained in the preceding subsection, the optimal voltage proles are determined by an Optimal
Reactive Power Flow program [96]. The ORPF mathematical model is compact reduced:
min F (u) (3.1)
subject to
Xmin X (u) Xmax (3.2)
u u u (3.3)
min max
where u = [vg; qg; rt; qb] is the vector of the reactive control variables X = [V; Qg] is the
and dependent variable vector.
The reactive control variables, on which the optimization algorithm acts, are:
terminal voltages of the control generation buses that are reactive slack buses, i. e. P-V and j-
V buses (vg);
reactive power injections (or withdrawals, if under-excited) by control generators at P-Q buses
or at j-Q bus6 (qg);
transformation ratios of OLTC transformers ( rt);
reactive power injections by compensation devices ( qb).
The dependent variables, whose values are determined by a load-ow calculation, after
solving the optimization problem and nding the optimal values of the control variables, are:
voltages at P-Q or j-Q buses, including the so called sentinel buses, that are load
buses where it is important to maintain an appropriate voltage prole since they
characterize the voltage prole of the EHV network 7 (V );
reactive power injections (or withdrawals) by control P-V or j-V generators (Qg).
The constraints (3.2)-(3.3) represent the technical and operational limitations. Xmin, Xmax, umin,
u
max are the lower and upper bounds of dependent and control variables. The dependent
variables X are expressed as linear functions of the control variables u by means of sensitivity
relations. The control variables u have to comply with some technical constraints, including:
the minimum and maximum voltages of control P-V or j-V generators;

6
This case is uncommon because the real slack bus is usually also a reactive one.
7
If the operational limits are fullled by the sentinel buses, also the other load nodes will comply with them.

the minimum and maximum reactive power injections (or withdrawals) by control
P-Q or j-Q generators, within their capability limits;

the minimum and maximum transformation ratios of OLTC transformers;

the maximum reactive power injections by compensation devices.
The dependant variables X have to satisfy some functional constraints, including:

the minimum and maximum reactive power injections by control P-V or j-V
generators, within their capability limits;

the minimum and maximum voltages at P-Q or j-Q buses;

the minimum and maximum voltages at sentinel buses; 8

the maximum real power produced by the Q-V bus within its capability limits.
The ORPF program can emphasize the security aspect or the economic one by
selecting one of the following objective functions:

security: equal distribution of reactive power margins;

economy: minimum real power losses.
As a usual practice, the second one is considered and in the objective function F (u) a quadratic
function is assumed for the network losses PL (or the real power injection PS by the slack bus).
The introduction of SVR involves the denition of:

pilot nodes of SVR areas (they are of sentinel type);

generating units belonging to each SVR area;
alignment constraints for reactive power production by generators of each SVR area.
In each SVR controlled area Ak, the reactive power productions of the N
gk controlling units
h i
q ;q ;:::;q
g1 g2 gNgk must satisfy the alignment constraints (the variable qAk is the area Ak reactive
level):
pu q Q
gj Ak
q = =Q =q (3.4)
gj q Ak j = 1; : : : ; Ngk
gj max Ak max
if the pu level qAk is positive (over-excited area Ak),

pu q Q
gj Ak
q = = Q =q (3.5)
gj q Ak j = 1; : : : ; Ngk
gj min Ak min
if the pu level q A
Ak is negative (under-excited area k),
where
N
gk
Xi
Q = q (3.6)
Ak gi
=1
8
The selection of the most signicant P-Q buses (sentinel buses) allows functional constraints (3.2) to be
strongly reduced.
N
gk
Q = q (3.7)
Ak min gi min
=1
Xi
N
gk
Q = q (3.8)
Ak max =1
gi max
Xi
are the reactive power production of area A
k and its lower and upper bound.
The variable q N
Ak takes the place of the gk reactive productions of the controlling units in the
new formulation of the problem.
If the reactive power ows between SVR areas ( Q
are included in the dependent rs)
variable vector, the problem will consider also the functional constraints that they have to satisfy
(i. e. minimum and maximum reactive power ows between SVR areas).
The ORPF model for the denition of the optimal reactive power levels (of each SVR area)
and of all the reactive control variables is given by (Problem P1):
min PS (vg; rt; qA; qg; qb) (3.9)

subject to
Vmin V (vg; rt; qA; qg; qb) Vmax (3.10)
Qg min Qg (vg; rt; qA; qg; qb) Qg max (3.11)
Q Q (v ; r ; q ; q ; q ) Q (3.12)
rs min rs g t A g b rs max
pu =q j = 1; : : : ; Ngk k = 1; : : : ; Nar
q Ak (3.13)
gj
v v v (3.14)
g min g g max
r r r (3.15)
t min t t max
q q q (3.16)
A min A A max
q q q (3.17)
g min g g max
q q q (3.18)
b min b b max
where qA is the vector of the reactive levels of the Nar SVR controlled areas.
In such a way, the number of the control variables is reduced. The variables vg and qg are pertinent to the
generators not controlled by SVR.
The set of constraints (3.10) contains the limitations on the voltages at P-Q and j-Q generation
buses (including the generating units belonging to the SVR areas) and at the sentinel buses (in-
cluding the pilot nodes). Constraints (3.11) include the capability limits of P-V and j-V generation
buses; in the adopted model for each bus i these limitations are quadratic functions of Pgi
and vgi . Constraints (3.12) are the limitations on the reactive power interchanges between
neighbouring areas.9 Equalities (3.13) are the area alignment constraints. Finally,
constraints (3.14)-(3.18) are the lower and upper bounds of the control variables.
3.7.1 Compact reduced ORPF model
Starting from a base case solution of the equations, the slack power variation PS with is
load-ow respect to the control variables expressed as a second order function of the
displacements u variables:
PS = rPS
T
u+ 1uT HS u (3.19)
2
where rPS and HS are the gradient and the Hessian matrix of PS (u).
The constraints on the dependent variables of the load-ow equations are linearized at the base
case solution. Therefore the limitations on the voltages at P-Q buses and on the reactive power
productions of P-V buses are expressed by the following linear inequality system:
A u b (3.20)
where A is the sensitivity matrix of the dependent variables with respect to the control variables.
The system (3.20) contains the linearization of the inequality constraints (3.10)-(3.12)
and of the equalities (3.13).
The algorithm used for solving the ORPF problem consists in the iterative solution of
quadratic problems, like the following (Problem P2):
1
min rPS
T
u+ 2 uT H L u (3.21)
subject to
A u b (3.22)
uminuumax (3.23)
HL is the the Hessian matrix of the Lagrangian function of Problem P1. A load-ow solution veries the
satisfaction of constraints (3.10)-(3.12) in P1 and allows the updating of the gradient vector rPS,
the matrix of the coe-cients A and the lower and upper bounds of the constraints in P2.
3.7.2 Reactive power value

The solution of Problem P
1 gives the optimal reactive level of each area, the associated pilot node
voltage reference, and the voltage set-points of the other units not operating in the SVR scheme.
Besides the Lagrange Multipliers (LMs) of the equality constraints (3.13) and of the active inequality
constraints (3.10)-(3.12) are available. It is known that the LM gives the variation of the
This set of constraints is included in the ORPF model only if the secondary voltage regulation
9
operates.
objective function when an active constraint experiences a unitary relaxation. The marginal
costs (benets) of the reactive power consumption (production) in the network buses are determined
by a linear combination of the real losses and of the active constraints' sensitivities to the nodal reactive
power injections at the ORPF solution point [100, 101].
The marginal losses' variation consequent to a nodal reactive injection in the bus i is given by:
dP @P Nar Ngk Akj @Q NQ @Vp NV @Ql (3.24)
L= L+ kj + Vp +
Ql
XX X Xl
dQ @Qi k=1 j=1 @Qi p=1 @Qi @Qi
=1
where:
P
L are
the real losses in the system (in MW);

Qi is the reactive power injection at P-Q or j-Q bus i (in Mvar);

NQ is the number of P-Q or j-Q buses in the network;

NV is the number of P-V or j-V generation buses in the network;
A is the matrix of the LMs of the alignment constraints (3.13);

are the LMs associated to the N

Q V binding constraints in the inequality set (3.11) (gener-
ators hitting their capability limits);
are the LMs associated to the N
V Q active constraints in the inequality set (3.10) (voltage of
P-Q buses hitting lower or upper bounds).
Therefore:
the rst term is the real losses' variation consequent to a nodal reactive injection Qi in the
bus i (losses' grandient);
the second term is the real losses' variation consequent to a nodal reactive injection Qi
in the bus i, that would occurr if the alignment equality constraints were relaxed;
the third term is the real losses' variation consequent to a nodal reactive injection Qi in the bus
i, that would occurr if the constraints on the voltage at P-Q or j-Q were relaxed;
the last term is the real losses' variation consequent to a nodal reactive injection
Qi in the bus i, that would occurr if the constraints on the reactive power
production/absorption at P-V or j-V generation buses were relaxed.
The resulting marginal cost (benet) at bus i (in ¿/Mvarh) will depend on the system marginal
price of the electric energy CMW h (¿/MWh):
Mvarh
Ci = CMW h dPL (3.25)
dQ
In conclusion, this nodal indicator provides the marginal reduction of the hourly cost of
¿
real losses ( /Mvarh) obtained by the additional injection of 1 Mvar in the selected bus.
The reactive power value in each bus is tightly connected to the technical limitations
aecting the system operation and to the operational constraints dened by the TSO.
The constraints included in the ORPF program can be classied according to their nature and to
the possibility to be slightly violated (if they are not due to technical or security limitations).
The constraints that cannot be violated in any way are dened hard constraints. Capability chart
limitations (3.11), depending on the synchronous generator characteristics and on the AVR
design, are hard constraints as well as the alignment constraints (3.13) deriving from SVR. The
limitations on the voltages at the EHV network buses (pilot or sentinel nodes) included in (3.10)
are operational constraints (not necessarily hard) depending on the TSO operational choices
and not strictly related to technical limitations. So they are dened soft constraints and their
possible contribution to reactive power marginal value can be disregarded.
3.8 Wind energy exploitation and reactive power support

The voltage control in the network is rendered more di-cult if conventional power stations
which are involved in the voltage control with synchronous generators are replaced by
wind energy plants, and no new devices are provided for reactive power supply.
Wind power plants have in fact certain characteristics that distinguish them from
conventional power generation technologies. Among those, the most impacting
reactive power control consider-ations are [102]:

Intermittency.
The lack of dispatchability, high variability of power output over time, and lower capacity
factors are in striking contrast with conventional generation sources. Unlike these, the
planner must anticipate that the wind plant may operate anywhere from zero to rated real
power output at any time, without regard to daily or seasonal load patterns.

Lack of geographic correlation with load.
Another important issue is the low level of geographic correlation between existing
transmis-sion capacity and prime wind resource areas. Consistent high wind speeds are
unattractive for commercial and residential development, so these areas tend to be very
sparsely popu-lated with little electric load. The consequence of this is that, in most
cases, wind power development will occur at weak (i. e. high source impedance)
locations in the transmission network. It follows that these locations would be the most
challenging with regard to voltage regulation and transient stability.

Asynchronous generation technology.
Up to now, wind turbine generators have, for the most part, utilized asynchronous
generator technology. In the case of variable speed wind turbines, it is able to provide
for aerodynamic e-ciency optimization by adapting the turbine rotor speed to the wind
speed. In addition, it provides for the structural load mitigation necessary to provide
acceptable life expectance in turbulent wind regimes. From a reactive power control
standpoint, however, these tech-nologies perform very dierently than conventional
wound-eld synchronous generator with exciters under voltage regulator control.
These three factors frequently create unique local voltage regulation issues not
ordinarily encoun-tered with dispatchable synchronous generating sources.
Initially, wind turbine generators were exempted from contribution to the reactive power. Now grid
codes in an increasing number of contries requires that wind farms take their share in reactive power
balance. The requirements vary from a demand to keep to near zero (unity power factor)
to specically dened leading and lagging requirements at rated output. The point at
which these requirements are dened typically depends on the ownership of the
interconnector between the wind farm and the grid.
The reactive power capability of wind turbines vary widely from that of induction generators
compensated with switched capacitors to generators with full AC/DC converters, with full vector
control, oering a variable dynamic response. When available, the capability can be used to control
the reactive power at the terminals of the wind farm, but only at a remote connection point to the
grid if it is electrically very close. Some wind farms operate with secondary voltage control, provided
by a wind farm controller, providing target reactive power set points for individual turbines.
Increased requirements for reactive power controllability will lead to changes in the
wind farm design and/or lead to the application of switched/controlled reactive power
compensation. The application of switched capacitors may have some limitations as
capacitor switching tends to have negative impact on wind turbine gear boxes. Power
electronics provide sophisticated means to dynamically supply reactive power.
It should be noted that the wind generator reactive power control ancillary services
may not always be available as typically wind generators are disconnected when the
wind speed is below the cut-in wind speed. For this reason separate substation based
reactive compensation may oer an advantage.
Wind farms will typically be connected to the network using one or more radial high-voltage
transmission lines or cables. In the case of AC overhead lines the reactive power
characteristics vary from capacitive to inductive as a function of line loading. In the case of an
underground or undersea AC cable connection, reactive power is supplied to the system and it
needs to be absorbed to avoid overvoltage. For large wind farms planned today, hundreds of
kilometres of high-voltage cables will be connected to the network which will require signicant
reactive power compensation installations and will lower the system resonnace frequency. For
HVDC connections there are no reactive power issues between the two terminals, and the
reactive power requirements at the connection point to the grid will typically be determined
either by the grid code, or by specic connection agreements [103].
3.8.1 Technical performance requirements for connection of wind farms

In the past, the technical requirements for connecting a generating plant were specied in
terms of large-size synchronous machines due to their exclusive use and dominant impact
on the grid. However, large-scale wind farms are now playing an increasingly important
role in many networks, and their fundamentally dierent operational characteristics when
compared with sinchronous machines need to be reected in modern grid codes. Grid code
requirements are tipically neutral as far as possible, but some have to be specic because
of the characteristics of wind generation. A summary of some regulatory requirements with
regard to reactive power control in steady-state conditions for wind plants follows [102].
3.8.1.1 Germany
According to the TransmissionCode 2007 and the subsequent SDLWindV [104, 105], each new wind
energy plant to be connected to the network must meet within the rated operating point the
requirements at the grid connection point according to a variant of Figure 3.4. The transmission grid
operator selects one of the potential variants on the basis of the relevant network requirements.
The agreed reactive power range must be able to be completely cycled through within
maximum four minutes and is to be provided at the operating point. Changes to the
reactive power specica-tions within the agreed reactive power range must be possible at
all times. The network operator must specify one of the three variants according to Figure
3.4 by the time of the grid connection of the wind energy converter on the basis of the
relevant network requirements. If the network operator later requires a variant other than
the one agreed, the claim for the system service bonus will remain unaected by this.
Apart from the requirements as to the reactive power supply at the rated operating point of the
wind energy plant, there are also requirements concerning operation with an instantaneous real
power, which is less than the operational installed real power. In this case, it must be possible
to operate the wind energy plant at every possible working point in accordance with the
generator output diagram. Figure 3.5 shows the minimum requirement for the reactive power
supply from generating units operating at less than full output at the grid connection point. The
highest re-active power range to be covered and the associated voltage band are indicated in
these gures. The abscissa indicates the reactive power to be provided in relation to the amount
of operational installed real power in percent. The ordinate indicates the instantaneous real
power (in the con-sumer meter arrow system negative) in relation to the amount of operational
installed real power in percent. Every point within the bordered areas in Figure 3.5 must be
able to be started up within four minutes. The requirement for this can result, depending on the
situation, in the network and denote a supply of reactive power taking priority over the real
power output. The operating mode is coordinated between the operators of the wind energy
plant and the operator of the transmission grid.
3.8.1.2 Spain
Operation of the high voltage transmission system in Spain is under the central control of Red
Eléctrica de España (REE). The Spanish Royal Decree 436/2004, in force till 2007, stated that
the wind plants were not required to participate in steady-state voltage regulation, but were in-
centivized to operate at or above specied power factors by premiums and penalties applied to
the feed-in tari. A new regulatory system, dened in the Spanish Royal Decree 661/2007, has
the aim of further favouring the wind integration in the power system. The incentives/penalties
associated to reactive power service are still eective, but now the wind farms above 10 MW
may be required to temporarily change their power factor by the TSO according to necessity.
As incentive to supply reactive power, a bonus or penalty is calculated as a percentage of a
¿
reference tari which presently has a value of 78.441 /MWh. The percentage rates are shown in
Table 3.2. Alternatively, operators of wind power plants can participate in a reactive power market
which, as of yet, has not been implemented. During peak load, there is an incentive to supply
capacitive power, during o-peak load there is an incentive to supply inductive power [106].
3.8.1.3 Italy
The Italian Regulatory Authority, with the regulatory order Electricity 98/08 of 25 July 2008 [107],
issued new rules for wind turbine generators (WTGs). It approved a new annex A17 of Italian Grid
Code [108], which requires new WTGs to have the capability to regulate their injection/withdrawal of
reactive power in the range 0.95 inductive power factor - 0.95 capacitive power factor at generator
terminals. The power factor can be kept xed at a certain value agreed by both the TSO and the
Figure 3.4: Minimum requirement for the network-side reactive power supply - Germany
Figure 3.5: PQ diagram of the wind energy plant at the grid connection point - Germany
Table 3.2: Bonus/penalty for reactive power as percentage of reference tari - Spain
wind farm's owner.

According to the AEEG Consultation 25/09 [109], the Italian TSO requires to update all pre-existing
WTGs in Southern Italy, Sicily, and Sardinia in order that they have the reactive regulation
capabilities dened in Annex A17. This would allow the denition - in the future - of reactive power
schedules for WTGs, based on local reactive needs. The Italian Regulatory Authority asked the TSO
to perform a technical survey of existing WTGs, including an estimation of costs for adapting them
to the reactive requirements of Annex A17. The resulting technical survey envisages that costs for
¿
reactive requirements have an average value of about 5400 per installed MW.
3.8.2 Technology solutions

A wide range of steady-state and dynamic reactive power control solutions exists for wind plants,
and the proper solution depends not only on the specic electrical characteristics of the transmission
system in the area of the plant, but also on the wind turbine generator topology. Most modern wind
turbines utilize one of the three electrical topologies shown in Figure 3.6 [102]:

line connected induction machines, either cage or wound rotor with slip (rotor
resistance) control (Figure 3.6 A);

doubly fed induction machines with line connected stators and power converter
controlled rotors (Figure 3.6 B);

synchronous or induction machines with stators connected through fully rated
power con-verters; induction machines include active rectiers, while synchronous
machines may utilize either active or passive rectication (Figure 3.6 C).
3.8.2.1 WTG based reactive power compensation

The line connected induction machine consumes reactive power for excitation and due to reactive
losses in the stator and rotor winding leakage inductances. Mechanically switched power factor
correction capacitors are frequently applied at the wind turbine terminal to raise the e ective
Figure 3.6: Common WTG electrical topologies
power factor of the machine under steady-state conditions. However, these mechanically switched
capacitors are of limited use in maintaining terminal voltage (and, hence, restraining torque) during
transmission system faults due to the inherent operational delays of the switches.
The doubly fed induction machine has inherent continuously-acting reactive power control capabil-
ity. The rotor side inverter is used to control the ux producing component of the generator rotor
currents to sink or source reactive power through the stator winding by under or over excitation of
the rotor. When transformed to the rotating reference frame, the rotor currents are DC, and the
machine behaves similar to a conventional wound eld synchronous machine. A second sink or
source of reactive power is the line-side inverter. The phase angle of the line-side currents with
respect to the line-side voltages is also continuously variable, and the line-side inverter's reactive
power capability remains available even if the wind turbine is not producing real power, e. g. un-der
low wind conditions. Under both steady-state and transient conditions, the reactive current capability
of the wind turbine is limited only by the current ratings of the two inverters.
Likewise, wind turbine generators with full conversion also have inherent continuous-acting
reactive power control capability. The line-side inverter carries the entire real and reactive
components of current, with the desired power factor, under either steady-state or transient
conditions, achieved by commanding appropriate direct and quadrature axis components of
line current. Again, the reactive current capability is limited only by the thermal limits of the
power converter or by other control limits imposed the wind turbine manufacturer [102].
3.8.2.2 External reactive power compensation

For wind plants utilizing turbines without reactive power control capability, or as supplemental
capability where the wind turbines' reactive power capacity is insu-cient to meet steady-state or
dynamic voltage regulation criteria, a number of external solutions are available. For reasons
of economy, the external solutions are normally applied at a single location in the wind
plant (typically the medium voltage bus in the plant's collector substation).
The simplest steady-state solutions are combinations of mechanically switched capacitors
and reac-tors. These solutions suer from a lack of granularity that can only be overcome
through reduced step sizes (increased costs), limited dynamic response due to
mechanical switching times, possible power quality issues due to inrush currents, and
signicant maintenance costs resulting from the high number of operations subjected on the
switches. Still, where the primary objective of the reactive power compensation system is
to satisfy steady-state voltage regulation concerns, this remains a viable solution.
3.9 Tests on the Italian EHV network

3.9.1 Main assumptions
Taking into account the objective of assessing simultaneously economy and security, the
tests are carried out on extreme peak load conditions of the Italian EHV system. Economic
evaluations should be intended only to derive locational dierences of marginal costs of
reactive power, as it is obvious that economic assessments have to be based on several
load conditions (in particular, fre-quent mid-peak conditions) or multi-scenario analysis.
However, the choice of studying extreme peak is justied by the aim of having a proper
assessment of system security under challenging conditions.
The ORPF procedure is thus applied to a detailed model of the Italian continental electrical system
(380 and 220 kV). A baseline future scenario is dened with reference to a peak load condition of the
winter 2014. Fifteen 380 kV wind power collection substations, 10
with a total installed capacity of
5000 MW, are considered in the study [110]: there are nine in Apulia (Troia, S. Severo, Deliceto,
Manfredonia, Cerignola, Spinazzola, Castellaneta, Erchie, and Latiano), two in Campania (Ariano
Irpino and Bisaccia), one in Basilicata (Irsina), and three in Calabria (Carlopoli, Maida, and
Marcedusa). Their geographical location is displayed in Figure 3.7, while Table 3.3 summarizes their
main features:11 the 380 kV lines to which the wind collection substations will be connected (second
column), the amount of the generation capacity installed and connected to each collectors (third
column), and some notes concerning the authorization process (fourth column).
3.9.1.1 Wind power production
Assuming in operation the second 380 kV link between Rizziconi in Calabria and Sorgente
in Sicily, according to the 2010 transmission system development plan, a power exchange
of 500 MW from Calabria to Sicily is supposed, even though actually other values of the
exchange (-500 MW, 0 MW) have been considered and investigated. This choice indeed
allows a larger dispatchability of the wind power generation in Southern Italy.
A traditional SCOPF (Security Constrained Optimal Power Flow), which determines the real power
dispatch at the minimum cost while fullling the transmission constraints (i. e. inter-zonal power limits
and current limits on grid branches), is used to estimate the maximum amount of wind generation
consistent with the maintenance of an adequate level of system security. In particular,
10 The collector is a 380/150 kV substation which will collect the electric power production by the wind farms
connected to it.
11 All the wind power collection substations, except for Troia, Deliceto, Bisaccia, and Maida, are under
authoriza-tion as works related to production initiatives according to the Legislative Decree 387/03.
Figure 3.7: Geographic location of the fteen wind collection substations
Table 3.3: Wind power collection substations
Table 3.4: Generation marginal costs of dierent thermoelectric technologies
Table 3.5: OPF results (maximum wind power generation)
regarding the production costs of the main generation technologies, the ranges in
Table 3.4 are assumed. To simulate the dispatching priority of wind generation, a lower
marginal production cost is considered for this technology so that any wind power
curtailment is exclusively due to binding transmission limits.
In order to estimate the maximum amount of wind generation consistent with the maintenance of an
adequate level of system security, the minimum power that can be produced by some CCGT plants
in Central-South Italy, namely one generating unit of Termoli, Gissi, Modugno, Enipower Brindisi,
Altomonte, Scandale, Simeri Crichi, Rizziconi, and the power plant of Candela, is assumed to be
equal to zero. Therefore, the OPF procedure can exclude them from service and at the same time
allow the wind farms to produce more power. In any case, this assumption takes into due
consideration the need to ensure a su-cient spinning reserve, supposed equal to 50% of the
dispatched wind power, on the thermoelectric units (both coal-red and CCGT) in service.
The optimization in N-1 security conditions considers the possible outage of the 380
and 220 kV lines whose trip may lead to exceed the operational limit of at least one
grid element with particular regard to the macro areas Central-South and South.
The OPF results are summarized in Table 3.5 with reference to the maximum amount of wind
power generation that can be produced according to the N and N-1 security criteria. In both
cases the value is lower than the total installed capacity (5000 MW) because of the active
network constraints in the third column. The OPF calculations in N-1 security conditions, that
preventively take into account the possible outage of each of the lines included in the
contingency list, make remarkable changes to the optimal generation schedule in intact system
conditions. The active constraints limit the wind power production which ows on the 380 kV line
Matera-S. Soa, especially between the future substations of Bisaccia and Avellino Nord.
The baseline scenario is dened supposing the real power productions to be xed and
considering the above OPF results.
3.9.1.2 SVR control areas, pilot nodes, and controlling generators

The selection of SVR control areas, pilot nodes, and controlling generators is made
according to the criteria described in subsection 3.6.3.1.
The pilot nodes, whose voltages reect the voltage proles of neighbouring buses, are suitably chosen
among the sentinel nodes. The selection strategy follows these main requirements [111]:

generators assigned to a certain area must be capable of highly aecting the
voltage of the corresponding pilot node (sensitivity requirement);

SVR areas should be decoupled as much as possible from the viewpoint of
reactive power support (decoupling requirement);

reactive power provisions by the controlling generators of a certain area, expressed in p.u.
(the so-called reactive power level), must be as like as possible (alignment requirement).
In order to meet the above conditions, the denition of SVR areas is performed by adopting some
specic voltage/var sensitivity criteria. Pilot nodes are chosen among the sentinel buses with the
@V
highest short-circuit power. Their selection is based on the sensitivity matrix
@Q : the lower is
its value, the higher is the short-circuit power.
As regards the sensitivity requirement, the pilot nodes are assumed as P-V buses, while the gener-
ators under SVR are modelled as P-Q ones. For each area k the sensitivity matrix @Qj;k provides
@Q
P;k
a measure of the eectiveness of the remote control action obtained by an additional supply of 1
Mvar by generator j, compared with a possible local control by a SVC (Static Var Compensator)
in the pilot node k: the nearer to unity is this value, the more adequate is the assignment of
generator j to area k.
Taking into account the alignment constraints imposed to the generators included in each SVR
@QP;k
@QA;k
should be as nearer as possible to unity, while the
@QP;k
@QP;k
, where Q
area, the computation of the square matrix
@Q
@Q
P;k
A;h is the reactive power level of
A;h
area h, allows the fullment of the decoupling constraints to be veried. In a right design of
the SVR areas, the diagonal entries

o-diagonal terms should be as small as possible.
As described in [100, 101, 112], to dene a suitable zonal reactive power market, a
further re-quirement should be considered: the marginal values of reactive power
produced by generators in a certain area, calculated by the ORPF, should be similar.
According to these requisites, the Italian continental EHV system is divided into thirteen SVR
areas, as shown in Figure 3.8, where pilot nodes are also highlighted. The controlling
generators assigned to each area are displayed in Figure 3.9 (North Italy: Casanova, Baggio,
S. Rocco al Porto, S. Fiorano, Ostiglia, and Dolo), 3.10 (Adriatic side: Forlì, Villanova, and
Brindisi Sud), and 3.11 (Tyrrhenian side: Calenzano, S. Lucia, S. Soa, and Laino).
Other schemes with dierent SVR areas and/or pilot nodes have been investigated to
dene the most appropriate one.
Selection of the pilot node of area 7 (Forlì or Porto Tolle). The pilot node of area 7 is selected
between the buses of Forlì in Emilia Romagna and Porto Tolle in Veneto. The comparison
is made considering the absolute value of the sensitivities @Qj;k with reference to the controlling
generators in the area (Enipower Ravenna and Porto Corsini). The diagram in Figure 3.12
clearly shows that the bus of Forlì is the most suitable for being the pilot node of area 7.
Selection of the pilot node of area 8 (Calenzano or Poggio a Caiano). The pilot node of area 8
is chosen between the buses of Calenzano and Poggio a Caiano, both in Tuscany. The
comparison is made considering the absolute value of the sensitivities @Qj;k with reference to the
Figure 3.8: SVR areas for the Italian EHV system
Figure 3.9: SVR areas and controlling generators - North Italy
Figure 3.10: SVR areas and controlling generators - Adriatic side
Figure 3.11: SVR areas and controlling generators - Tyrrhenian side
@Q
Figure 3.12: Sensitivities @Q
j;k
P;k
- Choice of the pilot node of SVR area 7
controlling generators in the area (La Spezia, Roselectra, Bargi, and S. Barbara). Since, according
to Figure 3.13, the bus of Bargi St., to which the hydroelectric groups are connected is electrically
closer, to the node of Calenzano, this one is selected as the pilot node in the area.
Selection of the pilot node of area 13 (Laino or Rossano Calabro). The pilot node of area 13
is chosen between the buses of Laino and Rossano Calabro, both in Calabria. The
@QP;k
@Qj;k
with reference to
comparison is made considering the absolute value of the sensitivities

the controlling generators in the area (Altomonte, Scandale, Simeri Crichi, and
Rizziconi). The diagram in Figure 3.14 makes it evident that the bus of Laino is the
most suitable for being the pilot node of area 13, since all the controlling groups are
electrically closer to this bus than to the other.
Denition of area 3 (pilot node: S. Rocco al Porto). Initially, a scheme, including only 12 SVR areas (i.
@QP;k
e. without the area of S. Rocco al Porto), is considered. In this conguration the generating units
of Piacenza and La Casella are assigned to the area of Baggio. The relevant
with reference to the controlling groups in the area (Fusina, Edison Marghera,
sensitivities @Qj;k are dis played in the dia gram of Figure 3.15, which shows that the valu es
relative to the above-mentioned power plants are the lowest (about half of the sensitivities of the
groups Enipower Ferrera and Turbigo) because of their longer electrical distance from the node of
Baggio and their smaller inuence on its voltage. These considerations suggest the denition of a new
SVR area with the bus of S. Rocco al Porto as pilot node and with the groups of Piacenza and La
Casella as controlling generators. Figure 3.16 conrms the correctness of this choice.
SVR scheme with 14 areas. The pilot node of area 6 is chosen between the buses of Dolo in
Veneto and Redipuglia in Friuli Venezia Giulia. The computation of the absolute value of the
@Q
sensitivities @Q
P;k
j;k
@Q
j;k
P;k
@Q
j;k
P;k
@Q
P;k
- Area 2 (Baggio)
j;k
@Q
j;k
P;k
- Generating units of La Casella and Piacenza
@Q
j;k
P;k
- Generating units of Torviscosa and Monfalcone
Torviscosa, and Monfalcone) indicates that the choice of Dolo as pilot node is correct,
except for the generators of Torviscosa and Monfalcone, which are electrically closer
to the bus of Redipuglia, as shown by the diagram in Figure 3.17.
These considerations suggest the denition of a new SVR area with the bus of Redipuglia as pilot
node and with the groups of Torviscosa and Monfalcone as controlling generators. But in this
conguration the decoupling requisite is not fullled by the two areas of the northern Adriatic side
@Q :
(i. e. Dolo and Redipuglia), as shown by the computation of the sensitivity matrix @Q
P;k
A;h
@Q = 0:742 M var @Q = 0:0847 M var

P;Dolo P;Dolo
M var M var
A;Dolo
@Q
A;Redipugli
@Q
a
@Q
P;Dolo
@Q
A;Redipuglia = 0:11
@Q
P;Dolo
@QA;Dolo
Fullment of decoupling and sensitivity requirements by the adopted SVR scheme.

The fullment of the decoupling constraints can be checked by calculating the sensitivity matrix
@QP;k
@QA;h (Table 3.6): in a right design of the SVR areas, in fact, the diagonal terms should be as
nearer as possible to unity, while the o-diagonal ones should be as small as possible.
For further verication of the matrix diagonal-dominance the Euclidean norm ne of the k-
th row vector (k = 1; : : : ; Nar) can be calculated and then compared with the innity norm
ni, i. e. the diagonal term. The results are summarized in Table 3.7, which highlights
the eectiveness of the proposed SVR scheme with the only exception of a weak
coupling between the areas of Casanova and Baggio.
@Q
@Q
P;k
Table 3.8 shows the values of the sensitivity
for all the generators under SVR. It allo ws
j;k
the fullment of the sensitivity constraints to be veried: in fact, the nearer to unity is this value,
Table 3.6: Sensitivities @Q
@QP;k
- Decoupling
requirement
A;h
Table 3.7: Diagonal-dominance of the matrix

@QP;k
@Q
A;k
Table 3.8: Sensitivities
@Q P;k
@Q
j;k
the more adequate is the assignment of generator j to area k. Considering the unhomogeneity of
the indices in certain SVR areas, the generating units with the lowest sensitivities (for
example, the power plant of Ponti sul Mincio in the area of Ostiglia) could be excluded
from the secondary voltage control.
3.9.2 Test cases

The denition of the test cases aims at assessing the perspective impact of large wind
power injections on the voltage control performances in the Italian EHV electrical system
and the benets that may be achieved thanks to the network reinforcements included in the
development plan, evaluating the economy and security level achievable in the Italian
system at 2014 peak-load under optimal reactive power schedules.
The test cases are therefore dened considering the following aspects:
1. what kind of generators operates under voltage control (synchronous generators

and/or wind farms);
2. planned transmission reinforcements in service or not in service;
3. presence of the wind farms connected to the fteen collection substations in

Table 3.3. They can be summarized as follows:
1. Case 1: only synchronous generators operating under voltage control-

transmission reinforce-ments in service-wind farms' power factor equal to unity.
2. Case 2: only synchronous generators operating under voltage control-transmission

reinforce-ments not in service-wind farms' power factor equal to unity.
3. Case 3: only synchronous generators operating under voltage control-

transmission reinforce-ments in service-no wind farms.
4. Case 4: synchronous generators and wind farms operating under voltage control-
transmission reinforcements in service.
5. Case 5: synchronous generators and wind farms operating under voltage control-
transmission reinforcements not in service.
All the simulations consider the operation of AVR only and the operation of both AVR
and SVR. Obviously, the use of the ORPF program will also allow the determination of
the optimal reac-tive power schedules that t the needs of the system operator, and the
denition of a possible remuneration scheme for reactive power providers.
3.9.3 Results
3.9.3.1 Test case 1
The test case 1 considers the transmission network reinforced as planned by the
Italian TSO for the year 2014 and a wind farms' power factor equal to 1.
Table 3.9 summarizes some ORPF results for Case 1 for both AVR and SVR: voltage magnitudes in pilot
nodes and the total reactive power production of each area calculated as the ratio between
Table 3.9: Pilot node voltages and reactive power productions - Case 1
the actual value Q and the maximum Q

. These results show that the Eastern
REF
Adriatic coast, i. e. areas of Dolo, Forlì, and Villanova, is characterised by a relatively high
utilization (0.67-0.79 p.u.) of its reactive resources, which are however relatively poor
compared to other areas, especially in the area of Forlì and Villanova. In the case of
generators under SVR, there is a small decrease. Voltage values are within their
acceptable limits, with minimum voltage 388 kV in S. Soa (South-West of Italy).
Under primary voltage control, the ORPF procedure, which calculates the optimal voltage refer-ence
for each generation unit while minimizing the real power losses, generally raises the voltage
magnitude at the grid buses with respect to the pre-optimization condition. Nevertheless, the
exploitation of the controlling groups may not be optimal because of their dierent utilization and
consequently some generators may have very small reactive power margins. In fact, the main
objective of AVR is to raise the voltages as much as possible, thus reducing the real power losses in
the system, by reducing the line currents and by compensating for the reactive losses thanks to the
increase of the reactive production of the line capacitances. Figure 3.18 shows some signicant
examples with reference to the areas of Dolo, Forlì, and Villanova.
The additional constraints on the controlling generators under SVR has just the aim of aligning their
reactive power productions with the reactive level of the corresponding area, thus ensuring the
reactive margins being uniformly distributed among the groups. These constraints usually increase
the control capability, so increasing the network security level also in case of disturbances that may
require considerable amounts of reactive power to be available. Therefore, while gen-erally reducing
the real power losses in the system, the Secondary Voltage Regulation primarily pursues the goal of
security maintenance through the ful lment of the alignment constraints. For this reason, the voltage
magnitudes are usually lower than under AVR only. As shown in Ta-ble 3.9, the biggest reductions refer
to the pilot nodes Dolo (AVR: 401.81 kV; SVR: 395.21 kV) and Forlì (AVR: 408.10 kV; SVR: 403.02 kV). The
Primary Voltage Regulation increases the volt-ages compared to the pre-optimization condition, but the
distribution of the reactive margins within the above-mentioned areas is quite irregular. The
introduction of SVR and especially of the alignment constraints reduces the voltage in the pilot nodes by
about 5-6 kV, while reducing the total reactive power production and hence increasing the reactive
margin with respect to both the pre-optimization condition and PVR operation only.
Figure 3.18: Reactive power margins under AVR control (areas of Dolo, Forlì, and Villanova)
As explained before, though the objective function of the ORPF procedure is the minimization of the
real power losses in the grid, the optimization under SVR has a second goal, that is, the alignment
of the reactive power generations in each control area to increase the system security. In fact, the
real losses amount to 469.37 MW under AVR and 475.74 MW under SVR. Their variations with
respect to the pre-optimization condition are -3.87% and -2.57% respectively.
The results show the benets of determining the reference values for voltage regulators,
also under AVR only, by using an appropriate reactive power optimization procedure. First,
the system operation economy takes advantage from it since it allows the real losses to be
reduced. Also the system security is improved because the voltage magnitudes in the
system are usually increased under both AVR and SVR compared to the pre-optimization
condition. This is an important eect above all in the case of particularly stressed operating
conditions. Moreover, the outcomes demonstrate the importance of adopting the
Secondary Voltage Regulation since it allows the reactive resources to be better exploited,
increasing the available reactive power margins and hence the system controllability.
Besides these technical aspects, that are important for the System Operator, another issue,
con-cerning the denition of a suitable remuneration scheme for reactive power providers, can be
investigated and a possible solution can be proposed on the basis of the ORPF procedure
results. As described in subsection 3.7.2, the optimization tool calculates an economic indicator
that indi-cates the value of the reactive resources in a node: the nodal marginal value of reactive
power. It is determined by the inuence of the reactive injection on the real power losses
¿
(MW/Mvar) and their cost (in this study: 100 /MWh) and it is based on the calculation of some
sensitivity coef-cients that, for a particular system condition, can be given by the ORPF
dispatching procedure. So this nodal indicator provides the marginal reduction of the hourly cost
¿
of real losses ( /Mvarh) obtained by the additional injection of 1 Mvar in the selected node.
Figures 3.19-3.31 show the nodal marginal values of reactive power in each control area with
Figure 3.19: Nodal marginal values of reactive power - Area 1





reference to the pilot nodes 12 and the high-voltage bus-bars of the P-Q controlling generators.
These indicators are generally smaller when only AVR operates, while they are usually
increased under SVR because of a larger contribution of the losses' gradient and the presence
of the alignment constraints. Table 3.10 shows the contribute of the losses' gradient and the
nodal marginal value of reactive power in the pilot nodes under both AVR and SVR.
Figures 3.19-3.31 make it evident that the reactive power value is higher in those areas where
the grid is less meshed (for instance, in Southern Italy), the load is big (for example, in the
areas of Baggio, Dolo, and S. Soa), and the reactive resources are poor (for instance, in the
areas of Forlì and Villanova). This means that the adopted methodology is able to evaluate the
importance of the reactive resources for system operating security and above all to introduce
dierentials among the grid buses according to their location in the network: the more
indispensable the reactive source, the higher its economic value and remuneration.
Apart from a few exceptions, regarding in particular the generators of Ponti sul Mincio in the area of
Ostiglia and Modugno in the area of Brindisi Sud, the nodal marginal value of reactive power in a
pilot node can be assumed as representative of the others. The variability of the nodal marginal
@QP;k
@Qj;k
: the greater is the homogeneity of
costs is strictly related to the variability of the sensitivity

these sensitivities, that is, the better is the position of the pilot node with respect to its
controlling groups, the smaller is the variability of the nodal marginal values of reactive power.
We can conclude that the adoption of a hierarchical voltage control architecture and especially of
the secondary regulation level can be the basis for implementing a suitable remuneration scheme
for reactive providers, which are compensated for their service according to their position in the grid.
In fact, the subdivision of the network into SVR areas, if appropriately dened, can be a good way to
implement a regional (zonal) reactive power market. The selection of the control areas and of the
generators under SVR must thus take into account also the homogeneity among the nodal
The pilot node in each gure is labelled with *.
12
Table 3.10: Losses' gradient and nodal marginal value in pilot nodes
marginal values of reactive power within a certain area.
3.9.3.2 Test case 2
The test case 2 is dened as Case 1, except for the assumption that the transmission
system has its present structure. The simulations have in fact the aim of assessing the
consequences of a possible delay in the completion of the grid development plan and
thus the benets deriving from the transmission system reinforcement.
Table 3.11 summarizes some ORPF results for Case 2 for both AVR and SVR: voltage
magnitudes in pilot nodes and the total reactive power production of each area.
In Case 2 there is a signicant reduction of reactive power margins in all Central-Southern areas
(Villanova, S. Lucia, Brindisi, S. Soa, and Laino), where the overall increase of reactive injection is
1115 Mvar under AVR and 1088 Mvar under SVR, while it is 1539 Mvar under AVR and 1488 Mvar
under SVR in the whole Italy. Further, there is a signicant reduction of voltages in Villanova and
S. Soa, that drop to very low values (Figure 3.32):

Villanova
396.57 kV ! 370.50 kV under AVR only;
Figure 3.32: SVR voltage prole of pilot nodes - Case 1 and Case 2
393.96kV ! 367.28 kV when also SVR operates.

S. Soa
388.12kV ! 372.83 kV under AVR only;
388.12 kV ! 372.01 kV when also SVR operates.
Indeed, under SVR, saturation of reactive capabilities occur in Villanova control area,
causing the drop of Villanova voltage to 367 kV. Also the reactive margins of the areas
of S. Lucia, S. Soa, and Laino decrease, with a reactive zonal production of about
0.75, 0.70, and 0.79 p.u. respectively under SVR. Only the area of Brindisi Sud in
Southern Italy is not critical, although also its reactive power production increases: it is
in fact rich in terms of available reactive resources compared to its load.
This test case, which refers to a very stressed operating condition, as shown by the
low voltage values in Central-Southern Italy and on the Adriatic side, demonstrates
even clearlier the need to use an ORPF procedure to determine the set-points for
voltage regulators. At present the grid in these areas is poorly meshed and hence the
reactive power resources need to be exploited as well as possible.
Besides these indications about power system management, the results highlight the need
for the completion of the transmission system development planned by the Italian TSO for
the year 2014. In particular, the saturation of reactive resources in Villanova area
underlines the importance of doubling the Adriatic backbone between the substations of
Villanova and Foggia. In case of delay in the authorization and realization of this network
upgrade, it would be necessary to install adequate reactive compensation devices, e. g.
capacitor banks, in view of the power system expansion in the medium term.
¿
Figure 3.33 displays the values of the economic indicator /Mvarh: as already explained, the
greater is the value, the more critical is the corresponding area. Reactive power injections and
Figure 3.33: Reactive marginal values in pilot nodes - Case 1 and Case 2
withdrawals in the areas of Villanova, S. Soa, and Laino have the highest marginal costs:

Case 1
¿
Villanova AVR - SVR: 1.641 - 1.795 /Mvarh;
¿
S. Soa AVR - SVR: 1.376 - 1.776 /Mvarh;
¿
Laino AVR - SVR: 1.286 - 1.614 /Mvarh.

Case 2
¿
¿
¿
These economic indicators are characterized by signicant regional variations, ranging from 0.2
¿ ¿
/Mvarh in Northern Italy up to 4.1 /Mvarh on the Adriatic side of Central Italy. Moreover, the
economic indicators demonstrate the improvements achievable thanks to the major grid rein-
forcements, as they double in the most critical areas in Case 2 without grid reinforcements.
¿
A map of /Mvarh indicators for the Italian EHV system is shown in Figure 3.34: the highest values
(blue-green coloured regions) refer to Central-South Italy, because of its poorly meshed grid, if not
properly reinforced, and the large-size wind farms that are expected in the medium term and whose
power production is likely to substitute the thermoelectric one. The map conrms the considerations
at the ending of the preceding paragraph about the possible implementation of a regional-based
reactive power remuneration mechanism: the subdivision in homogeneously coloured zones
respects the division of the Italian EHV system into the SVR areas in Figure 3.8, so demonstrating
the usefulness and the eectiveness of the proposed methodology [113].
Since the ¿/Mvarh indicators and hence their graphical representation identify the grid locations where
the reactive resources are more valuable from an economic point of view because of their
¿
Figure 3.34: Map of nodal /Mvarh indicators - Case 2
indispensability for power system operation, the information provided by the map can be
also used by the transmission planner to easily identify the poorest grid areas in terms of
reactive capability where additional measures have to be taken to control grid voltages.
3.9.3.3 Test case 3
A third case (named Case 3) is analysed to assess the impact of wind generation on
voltage proles and reactive power margins essential to preserve the system security and
controllability in case of contingency. The wind power production is assumed to be zero
and it is substituted by an equivalent amount produced by combined cycle gas turbines
(CCGT) in Southern Italy. Transmission reinforcements are supposed in service.
Table 3.1213 gives the voltage magnitudes in pilot nodes and the total reactive power
production of each area in Mvar and in p.u..
In Case 3 the reactive power margins in Central-Southern Italy are higher than in Case 1 (-
576 Mvar under AVR and -434 Mvar under SVR), especially in Villanova control area, as
shown in Figure 3.35, which displays the Mvar still available in each control area.
Figure 3.36 compares the marginal costs of reactive power in pilot nodes in Case 3 vs. Case 1, while
Figure 3.37 considers the 380 kV wind power collection substations. The presence of wind power
generation with xed power factor (equal to unity) in Case 1 (and maybe real power re-dispatching
13The reactive power margins in per unit are calculated considering the reference values QREF of the base case
(Case 1) to allow the comparison with the other test cases, although the maximum reactive power capabilities in
Southern Italy in Case 3 are higher because the wind farms are substituted in production by thermoelectric units which
can participate to reactive power support and voltage control.
Figure 3.35: Reactive power margins in Central-Southern Italy - Case 1 and Case 3
Figure 3.36: Reactive marginal values in pilot nodes - Case 1 and Case 3
as well) causes a substantial increase in marginal costs of reactive power in Central-

Southern Italy, especially in the areas of Villanova, S. Soa, and Laino:

Villanova
¿
0.702 /Mvarh under AVR only;
¿
0.926 /Mvarh when also SVR operates.

S. Soa
¿
¿

Laino
¿
¿
The reactive control in the area of Brindisi is less critical than in the areas of Villanova, S. Soa,
and Laino, as witnessed by the nodal marginal costs in its three 380 kV wind power collection
substations (Erchie, Latiano, and Castellaneta), because its reactive resources are greater
than in the neighbouring areas. The nodal marginal cost of reactive power in Castellaneta is
higher than the values in Erchie and Latiano, which are closer to Brindisi large thermoelectric
generation units. Nodal reactive marginal costs in Carlopoli, Maida, and Marcedusa are
somewhat lower than the value in Laino, which is their pilot node. Nodal reactive values in all
other wind collection substations are similar to the value in Villanova. The results of Case 3
show that, even with the same system and generation external conditions and real power
market price (cost of losses), actual very high or very low production of wind power can lead to
signicant dierences of nodal reactive values in the most critical network areas.
Figure 3.37: Reactive marginal values in wind collector substations - Case 1 and Case 3
3.9.3.4 Test cases 4 and 5
Finally, two analyses are performed considering dierent hypotheses about the reactive charac-
teristics of WTGs (capability to control their power factor in the range 0.95 over-excited/0.95
under-excited), according to the provisions of annex A17 of the Italian Grid Code [108]. The
pos-sible participation of WTGs to voltage control, both AVR and - more theoretically - SVR
(thanks to the exploitation of suitable power electronics devices) is studied in Case 4 with all
grid reinforce-ments and in Case 5 without reinforcements. A new control area (area of Foggia)
is dened and some wind power generators in Apulia and Campania (Deliceto, S. Severo,
Manfredonia, Cerignola, and Troia) are assigned to it. The others are instead assigned to the
areas of Brindisi Sud (Irsina, Castellaneta, Erchie, and Latiano), S. Soa (Ariano Irpino,
Spinazzola, and Bisaccia), and Laino (Marcedusa, Maida, and Carlopoli).
The additional reactive resource is about 1250 Mvar, according to the allowed power factor
range: 0.95 under-excited/0.95 over-excited. The reactive power productions in Central-
Southern Italy in Case 4 are lower than in Case 1 (about -402 Mvar under AVR and -200
Mvar under SVR), with main changes in Villanova area, while the voltage prole does not
show signicant variations. As given in Table 3.13, reactive power margins available in the
most critical areas improve. In particular, as regards Villanova area, whose reactive
capability is the same of Case 1, its reactive margin increases:

under AVR: from 0.21 p.u. in Case 1 to 0.79 p.u. in Case 4;

under SVR: from 0.24 p.u. in Case 1 to 0.75 p.u. in Case 4.
This reduction is due to the reactive power production by the wind farms' generators belonging to
Foggia control area, which produce about 280 Mvar under AVR operation and nearly 360 Mvar when
also SVR functions.
The benets of WTG participation to voltage control are reected by decreasing nodal
reactive values with respect to Case 1:

Case 1
¿
¿
¿

Case 4
¿
¿
¿
Figure 3.38 displays the nodal reactive marginal costs in wind collector substations: it
conrms the overall decrease in reactive power values in Central-Southern Italy thanks
to the contribution of the wind generators to reactive support.
The test case 5 is derived from Case 2 assuming that the wind farms' generators participate to
voltage regulation. Case 2, in which all network upgrades are not supposed in service, represents a
very stressed operating condition from the viewpoint of reactive power provision by the System
Operator, because the reactive resources in some grid areas are not enough to support voltage so
that in some nodes it drops under 370 kV. Also the simulation on Case 5 has the aim of assessing
the possible benets that may derive from the participation of the wind farms to voltage control and
reactive power support. Table 3.14 summarizes some ORPF outcomes.
The comparison between Case 2 (Table 3.9) and Case 5 (Table 3.14) makes it clear that the
contribution of WTGs to voltage regulation can be very important to manage the system with an
adequate security level, particularly in stressed operation conditions. The availability of more
reactive resources in Southern Italy causes a substantial increase in voltage magnitudes in the most
critical areas (Villanova and S. Soa), which are now within the acceptable range (Figure 3.39).
The benets already shown in the preceding test case are very crucial in Case 5. For instance, as
regards Villanova area, its reactive margin increases notably and in particular the new reactive
Figure 3.38: Reactive marginal values in wind collector substations - Case 1 and Case 4
Figure 3.39: Voltage prole of pilot nodes - Case 2 and Case 5
resources in the neighbouring area of Foggia allow the saturation of the reactive
capability in Villanova area to be avoided:

under AVR: from 0.07 p.u. in Case 2 to 0.24 p.u. in Case 5;

under SVR: from saturation in Case 2 to 0.13 p.u. in
Case 5. The highest nodal marginal values change as follows:

Case 2
¿
¿
¿

Case 5
¿
¿
¿
3.9.3.5 Real losses' variation
The importance of transmission system development, from both economic and security point of
view, is demonstrated also by real losses' variation in the various test cases, as shown in Table
3.15. The most favourable scenario is Case 3, i. e. without wind power generation, while Cases 2
and 5 have the highest losses because of the absence of network reinforcements (about 100 MW
addi-tional losses, i. e. 20% of power losses in the grid model under study). Benets can be quanti ed
multiplying the reduction of real power losses by the price of real power determined by market
Table 3.15: Real losses and their variations with reference to Case 3
clearing. In the cases without grid reinforcements, WTG participation to voltage regulation
(Case 5) allows a 25 MW decrease of real losses compared to Case 2. The security increase,
already remarked by the comparison of reactive margins Case 4 vs. Case 5, would also reduce
the practical need for constraining on expensive generators in South Italy.
3.10 Chapter conclusions

Liberalised electricity markets consider voltage regulation and reactive power support as an
ancil-lary service. Reactive power is required for transmission of real power, voltage and
system control, and normal operation of power systems. Therefore, reactive power service can
be considered one of the most important ancillary services in electricity market. However, the
origin and the main characteristics of reactive power, rst of all its very local nature and its highly
limited ability to travel in the network, raise some di-culties in its management in a deregulated
environment. The acquisition and pricing of the reactive power and voltage support services is
the major challenge. In vertically integrated structures, one utility operated power generation
units, on the one hand, and transmission and distribution systems, on the other hand. It also
handled the voltage control issue, both in the short-term (day-to-day dispatch of units) and
long-term (system planning). The cost of this service was implicitly taken into account in the
cost of the energy supply for end consumers.
As a consequence of the restructuring of electric industry and the resulting deintegration of gen-
eration and transmission, the reactive power support and the voltage regulation are no longer an
integral part of the electricity supply. Further, the competition requires that the costs associated with
this ancillary service is made explicit by means of suitable methods. The provision mecha-nism and
above all the tari structure for reactive power must thus consider the dierent views of buyers and
sellers. The former, the TSO, tends to give a societal evaluation of available reactive resources
based on the expected benets deriving from their utilization. The latter, producers, on the contrary,
aim at the economic compensation in order to recover costs that they incur, while sometimes
forgetting the concept that voltage regulation and reactive power support are essential system
services needed to deliver the real power which they supply to consumers. Main task of the TSO is
to determine the value of the reactive power support required to the generation buses in order to t
its needs for a secure and e-cient system operation. Also a consistent reactive price structure for
nancial compensation of reactive power providers needs to be dened: the basis for its
implementation can be the estimated values of the reactive support in grid nodes.
Besides the above aspects which derive from the peculiarities of reactive power service and the
restructuring process, among the recent developments that challenge the traditional approach to
voltage control, there is the increasing concern towards wind energy exploitation for generating
electricity. An increasing penetration of wind power, normally characterised by limited reactive

support and voltage control capabilities and displacing thermoelectric generation with greater
capabilities, causes a reduction of the reactive resources available in the power system. For
this reason, transmission operators and planners and wind project developers alike are facing
increasing challenges with regard to reactive power control. The economies of scale of larger
and larger plants and increasing development of sites far from load centers are contributing
factors. Regulations and standards in this area are in a state of ux as a result of the rapid
changes in market incentives and in the wind turbine technology itself. Wind turbine and power
system equipment manufacturers are responding to these challenges by making technical
solutions available to the project planner, and regulations and standards with regard to wind
reactive power capability are slowly catching up with the market.
The analysis has investigated three main issues: the optimal reactive power provision that
ts the needs of system operator, the denition of an economic compensation structure for
reactive power suppliers, and the impact of wind power on voltage control and reactive
power support. The study has focused on the Italian case with reference to the projection
horizon of the year 2014 in peak load conditions, and the simulations have been carried
out by means of an Optimal Reactive Power Flow (ORPF) procedure and by considering
the voltage control structure designed for the Italian EHV network.
The problem has been analysed mainly from the TSO perspective, though the adoption of a
hierarchical voltage regulation architecture and of a suitable reactive power optimization
program allow a possible remuneration scheme for reactive power providers to be dened. In
particular, in addition to the voltage and reactive reference values for the voltage regulators,
resulting from the optimization of the reactive power schedule problem, the ORPF procedure
¿
calculates a nodal indicator ( /Mvarh) which represents the marginal real losses' variation
consequent to a nodal reactive injection in a certain grid bus and thus gives a measure of
reactive power value. These indicators provide signicant price signals needed for the economic
compensation for reactive power supply so quantifying the reactive power cost in grid nodes
and identifying the system areas where this resource is particularly valuable.
The simulations on the Italian EHV continental system has demonstrated that the
power sys-tem operation benets from the optimization of the reactive power schedule
problem also under Automatic Voltage Regulation (AVR) only, from both technical
(voltage increase) and economic (real losses' reduction) point of view. The adoption of
a higher voltage control level (SVR) allows system security to be further enhanced
since, while minimizing real power losses, it aligns the reactive power margins of the
controlling generators in each SVR areas, so increasing the system controllability.
Moreover, the determination of nodal marginal reactive values by the ORPF procedure can
be used to propose a reactive pricing structure suitable for deregulated electric market
frameworks. The tests described in the chapter have highlighted that the presence of an
adequate HVC (Hierarchical Volatge Control) scheme and above all an appropriate
subdivision of the electrical system into SVR control areas can be useful to dene a zonal
structure for eventual locational dierences in reactive power valorisation.
Finally, the test cases, to which the ORPF program has been applied, have been dened
with the aim of assessing the expected impact of an increasing penetration of wind energy
in the Italian transmission system, on the one hand, and the bene ts deriving from the
realization of the major network reinforcements planned by the TSO, on the other hand.
In order to quantify wind impact on voltage regulation and reactive support, both the economic
aspect, represented by the nodal marginal values, and the security one, based on the reactive
power margins available on controlling generating units and on their usability to cope with possible
per-turbations, have been investigated. The results could be taken into account when evaluating the
eventual update of the regulatory treatment of the voltage control ancillary service and of reactive
transits at the connection points across grids. Specic results have shown that the optimization
outcomes vary remarkably depending on the actual high or low level of wind production. Further, the
eect of WTGs' participation in voltage control and reactive power support has been analysed. The
simulations have shown that their participation to primary and also secondary voltage regu-lation
can be helpful to increase the reactive resources available in a certain grid area, which can be
indispensable especially in very stressed operating conditions.
Finally, the tests' outcomes have underlined the need to complete the grid
development plan dened by the TSO for the medium term for a better exploitation of
reactive resources, also in view of the expected growth of wind power.
Chapter 4
Conclusions
The research work presented in this thesis has focused on the consequences of the
deintegration of generation and transmission resulting from the restructuring and
liberalisation of the electricity industry. In the new environment these activities are no
longer combined in vertically integrated utilities as they used to be. The objectives of
power producers and system operators are completely dierent and thus the new situation
has introduced new challenges aecting both planning and operation of power systems.
The rst part of the research work has dealt with the relationship between generation expansion and
transmission development in presence of competition on the supply side. The objective has been to
demonstrate that a more coordination in the planning process of generation and transmission
systems can contribute to a more coherent development of the whole power system enhancing its
operational reliability and security and improving electricity market e-ciency. The need for a well-
coordinated planning activity is based on several considerations, particularly on the reciprocal
dependence between the development decisions of these two systems.
The methodology described in Chapter 2 is based on the concept that generation and transmis-
sion investments can be interchangeable and, if properly dened, they can favourably aect both
system operation security and market e-ciency. The implementation in the Matlab program-
ming language of the procedure for calculating and plotting Weighted Transmission Loading
Relief (WTLR) sensitivities and the tests on the CIGRE 63-bus network and then on the Italian
EHV electric system have highlighted the eectiveness of these nodal indices for the selection of
invest-ments in both generation and transmission. In particular, it has proved to be a useful tool
for transmission planner since it is able to provide very interesting information about the
weakest grid sections and the impact of generation expansion on network security, and to help
the grid planner to dene possible priority lists of planned reinforcements and to determine new
network upgrades. Further, it can be used to underline the benets of the grid development plan
and the importance of its realization and to send generation owners clear indications about the
most suitable grid areas for installing new power plants in order to avoid possible limitations on
power production due to some network constraint.
Besides these application aspects, which have been demonstrated and shown by the simulations'
outcomes, an important phase of the research work has been to investigate the limits of the original
WTLR methodology and to propose possible solutions. The rst objective has been the reduction of
the total computational time of the Matlab-coded procedure by introducing the Line Outage
Distribution Factors (LODFs) to calculate the real power ows in post-contingency conditions, and
164
CHAPTER 4. CONCLUSIONS 165
by using the base ISDFs, that is, in intact system conditions, to compute the WTLRs. The
second objective has been to remove the WTLR dependence on the selection of the slack bus
in the grid. Therefore, the concept of distributed slack bus has been introduced in both load ow
calculations and ISDF computation. Finally, the MVA rating approximation, that is the main limit
of the original methodology, has been removed by suitably modifying the original Matlab-coded
program to consider the actual power ow limits in the calculation of branch overloads.
The second part of the research work has focused on the reactive power service in a
liberalised environment. The three main issues investigated in Chapter 3 have been: the
optimal reactive power provision that ts the needs and requirements of system operator,
the denition of a nancial compensation structure for reactive power suppliers, and the
impact of wind power on voltage control and reactive power support.
The analysis has been carried out considering the perspective of system operators, which are re-
sponsible for a secure and reliable system operation and for the acquisition of all services, including
reactive power support and voltage regulation, indispensable for maintaining adequate standards of
power quality. Therefore, they have the task of implementing a suitable structure for e-ciently
managing this ancillary service and of assessing which resources are required according to both
economic and technical (i. e. grid topology) criteria. The adoption of a HVC scheme and an Op-timal
Reactive Power Flow procedure to dene its reference values (voltage and reactive power) has
proved to be an interesting starting point for the implementation of an e-cient mechanism for
reactive power provision by the TSO. Furthermore, on the basis of the estimated values of reactive
power when Secondary Voltage Regulation operates, a consistent reactive pricing structure and an
eective economic compensation scheme for reactive power suppliers can be dened.
Besides the above general issues, the tests carried out on the Italian EHV network with reference to
the projection year 2014 have investigated other two aspects: on the one hand, the impact of the
wind farms expected for the medium term in Southern Italy, and, on the other hand, the benets of
realizing the major network reinforcements planned by the Italian TSO. The forecasted increase of
wind power has in fact various implications in system design, planning, and operation. The analysis
has assessed the impact on voltage control, taking into account the current legislative, regulatory,
and technical framework with respect to voltage regulation and reactive requirements for producers
connected to the Italian national transmission grid. Further, WTGs participation in voltage control
has been considered and the outcomes have shown that it can be an eective way to integrate wind
power in electrical systems. Finally, some specic simulations have highlighted the need for the
completion of the transmission system development planned by the TSO, to better exploite the
available reactive resources and to support the increasing wind penetration. Therefore, simulation
results and conclusions that are derived from them might be useful in power system planning and for
regulatory purposes as well.
Appendix A
CIGRE-63 bus test system
The CIGRE 63-bus test system [18], shown in Figure A.1, has been used in this thesis to implement
and test the proposed Matlab-coded procedure for the calculation and graphical representation of
the Weighted Transmission Loading Relief (WTLR) sensitivities. Moreover, it has been used to
implement some modications in the original WTLR methodology: the introduction of the Line Outage
Distribution Factors (LODFs) and the adoption of the distributed slack bus concept.
The system can be divided in ve areas, named R, M, F, T, and V. The buses of each
area are labeled with an integer number with three gures, the area code, and the
voltage level. For instance, the buses 11R3, 65T2, and 9V1 belong to area R, T, and V
respectively, and are referred to the voltage levels 15 kV, 150 kV, and 220 kV.
The system encompasses a total demand of 2080 MW and has 63 nodes, 112 branches (lines
and transformers), and 16 thermoelectric generators. Bus 41M3 is selected as the slack bus.
The generators' cost curves are quadratic functions of the production P :
2 (A.1)
C(P ) = C0 + C1P + C2P
Area R represents an independent power producer, area M is the main grid at 220 kV,
while areas F, T, and V can represent three sub-transmission systems at 150 kV with
embedded generation. The prices of the generators in areas R and F are very low,
while prices oered in area V are very high.
Demand is supposed inelastic and so the aggregate consumer curve is represented
by a vertical line in the diagram quantity-price.
The data for generator buses is provided in Table A.1, including the generators' limits and
the three coe-cients of the cost curves. The demand at load buses are given in Table A.2.
The data for the transmission lines connecting system buses is given in Table A.3.
166
APPENDIX A. CIGRE-63 BUS TEST SYSTEM 167
Figure A.1: CIGRE 63-bus test system
Table A.1: Generator buses
APPENDIX A. CIGRE-63 BUS TEST SYSTEM 168
Table A.2: Load buses
Table A.3: Transmission lines
Appendix B
Power Distribution Factors
B.1 Basic distribution factors

We consider a system with N + 1 buses and L lines [13, 14]. We denote by N = f0; 1; 2; : : : ; N g
the set of buses, with the slack bus at bus 0, and by L = fl1; l2; : : : ; lLg the set of transmission
lines and transformers that connect the buses in the set N . We denote each element l 2 L
by the ordered pair l = (i; j) with the convention that the direction of the ow on line l is
from node i to node j. The serial admittance of line l is gl jbl, the real power ow is fl and
and we dene
f = [f1; f2; : : : ; fL]T . The net real power injection at node n is denoted by pn
1 2 set of power injection-withdrawal
p = p ;p ;:::;p
2N
N T . Transactions are represented by the
( I W ) node pairs, = w 1; w 2; : : : ; w , with each element in this set denoted by the ordered
W f g
triplet w = fm; n; tg representing an I W node pair with from node m, to node n, in the amount
t.
We study the response of the real line ow to changes in nodal injections. Consider the nodal
injection vector p and the corresponding real line ow vector f. Denote the system state by
s=
T
;V
T i T , where = 1 ; 2; : : : ; N T (V = 1 2
V ;V ;:::;V
N T ) is the voltage phase
h
angle p s f (0) that satisfy both
(magnitude) vector. Denote the reference conditions by (0)
(0), and
the equations:
(0) (0) (B.1)
g(s ) p =0
(0)
h(s ) f
(0)
=0 (B.2)
where equation (B.1) represents a statement of the real power ow equations and the
component l of h( ) is the expression for the real ow on line l = (i; j), l 2 L:
h i2 i j i i j (B.3)
hl (s) = gl V V V cos ( i j) + blV V sin ( i j)
For a small change p that changes the value from p(0) to p(0) + p, we denote by s ( f) the
corresponding change in the state s (real line ows f). We assume the system stays in balance for the
change p and neglect the changes in losses so that, for every MW increase in the injection at node n
6= 0, there is a corresponding MW increase in the withdrawal at the slack node 0. In other words, p0
P
= pn. We apply the rst order Taylor's series expansion near the reference
n2N; n6=0
169
APPENDIX B. POWER DISTRIBUTION FACTORS 170
(0):
point s
@g
g (s (0) g s + h:o:t: (B.4)
+ s) = @
s s(0)
(s(0)) +
h(s(0) + s) = h(s(0)) + @s s(0) s + h:o:t: (B.5)
@h
For small p, s is small and so we neglect the higher order terms ( h:o:t:). We furthermore
assume (@h=@s)s(0) to be non-singular and henceforth drop the bar in the notation so that:
s @g 1 p (B.6)
@
s 1
@g
@h @h
f s= p (B.7)
@s @s @s
The sensitivity matrix in equation (B.7) depends on and this dependence on the system
s(0)
operating point makes it less than practical for power system applications.
To simplify the computation of the sensitivity matrix, we next introduce the assumptions used in
the derivation of DC power ow models and make use of the reduced nodal susceptance matrix:
T 0 (B.8)
B = A~ B A~
~ T
where B0 = diag [b ; b ; : : : ; b ] is the diagonal branch susceptance matrix and A = [a~ ; a~ ; : : : ; a~ ]
1 2
L 1 2 L
i
is the branch-to-node incidence matrix with the row l of the matrix: a~l = 0 : : : 0 1 j T
0:::0 10:::0 .
We assume B to be non-singular. Under these assumptions, s reduces to and the expressions for
the partial derivatives become @g=@ B and @hl =@ b a~
l l
0
~ to
. We furthermore dene
A =B A
be the admittance weighted branch-node incidence matrix, then

1 (B.9)
f AB p= p
We henceforth replace the approximation by the equality:

f= p (B.10)
The L N matrix= A B 1 is an approximation of the sensitivity matrix and is called the

Injection Shift Distribution Factor (ISDF) matrix. Since A and B are solely determined by the
network topology and the line parameters, is independent of s(0). The ISDF of a line l 2 L with
n
respect to a change in injection at node n 2 N , n 6= 0 is the element l in row l, column n of
. Note that n
l is dened implicitly under the assumption that there is a corresponding change
0 0 n. Therefore, the ISDF is dependent on
p in the injection at the slack node 0 with p = p
the slack bus. As the location of the slack bus changes, the values of the ISDFs may change. The
notion of the ISDF may be extended to include the slack bus 0. Since the injection and withdrawal
buses are identical in this case, ln 0 for any l 2 L.
In many applications, the impacts of changes in the quantity of an I W node pair on the real
line ows are of interest. We may evaluate the change in the real ow on a line l due to a change
t in the transfer quantity of an I W node pair w = fm; n; tg 2 W with ISDFs. This change is
represented by setting pm = t = n
p . The corresponding real ow change on line l is
fl = l
m
p +
m
l
n n
p =(l
m
l
n
) t (B.11)
The ISDF dierence term is called the Power Transfer Distribution Factor (PTDF) of line
l with respect to the I W node pair w 2 W and is dened by
(w)
fl
=t m n (B.12)
'l = l l
In this case, the compensation at the slack bus cancels out since m n m 0
p p = p p
pnp0 . As such, the PTDF is independent of the slack bus.
A line l = (i; j) is radial if either Hi = flg or Hj = flg, where Hi (Hj ) is the set of lines that connect to
node i (j). For the radial line l with Hi = flg, i 6= 0,
(
ln = 0 otherwise (B.13)
1 if n = i
^
6
since the only impact on line l comes from the injection at node i. For any other line l = l,
the injection change at the terminal nodes i and j has the same impact,
i = j ^6= l
^ ^ 8l (B.14)
l l
B.2 Impact of changes in network topology and parameter values
The ISDFs and PTDFs play a key role in congestion modeling used in the new competitive
envi-ronment. Clearly, these factors are evaluated for a given topology and parameter
values and an operating point that satises, to a greater or lesser extent, the assumptions
cited in the previous section. However, in many cases of interest, there are changes in the
network topology, parameter values and the operating point, while the ISDFs and PTDFs
are held constant in the applications in which they are used. Such usage, in eect, neglects
the impacts of these changes. In this section, we evaluate the eect of these changes.
We rst consider the impacts of changes in network parameters. Let us denote by L0 = fl10; l20; : : : ; lL0g
L the subset of lines whose parameters are changed. For each line l0 2 L0, its line susceptance is
~
changed from bl0 to bl0 + bl0 . Denote the analogues of the matrices 0 ( ), and ( L N ) cor-
L
0
h i B L L A i T 1
0
responding to the lines in L

0
1 2 0
L 0
0 L h L0 0
2
0 ; a~
by B0 = diag bl0 ; bl0; : : : ; bl0 (L L ), A ~
= a~l l ; : : : ; a~l0
T
l
and 0 =
l
; l ;:::; l (L0 N) where Tl is row 0 of 0
, the ISDF matrix. Let
L h 1
0
2
0
L
i 0 0
0 0
B = diag bl ; bl ; : : : ; bl
0 0 , bl = 0, l
0
. The changes in L 0 result in changing the
0 0
0
L 1 2 L0 6 8 2L
~ T BL
0 ~
B matrix into B + A L
0
0 A L0 . This, in turn, changes each row of the ISDF matrix by:
b T b ~ ~
T =8 l l l l
T
A L0 BL
0
0 BL
0 1
0 + L0 A L0 L0 (B.15)
> bl bl + bl T T 1
l >
>
> T T 1
<
> l
T
A
~
L0
B L0
0B 0 1
L 0 + L0 A
~
L0
L 0 per l 2= L 0
>
>
>
:
The derivation of equation (B.15) is straightforward using the Sherman-Morrison-Woodbury for-

mula. 1
For , the L -dimensional row vector

0 T T~
T 0 0 1+
A~
T
0 0 = A 0
establishes
l 2= L l;L l L
0
BL0 BL0 T L
L0
= f 0; f 0; : : : ; f
the relation between the pre-change real ows f L0 l1 l2 lL00 and the change fl in
the real ows on line l = due to the parameter changes with iT
0 h f l
= f . Particularly,
0 0 0 0
2L i j l;L L
= l l (B.16)
l;l0
bl0 0j 0
+ li0 l 0
bl0
0 0 0 0
is Tproportional to the quantity l
i0 j0
l L = fl = (i ; j )g. Note that if both B and B +
~ T
~ ~ 0 1
+ is invertible.
A L0
0
BL 0 A L0 are non-singular, BL0 0BL 0 L0 AL0
B.2.1 Outage of a line

Network topology changes such as line outages and line additions may be considered as special
cases of parameter changes. For example, for the outage of a line l0 = (i0; j0), L0 = fl0g, A~L0 = a~lT0
and bl0 = bl0 , so that: 8
T
l 0 0
if l = l
T > i
0
j
0
=
>
l >
>
l l T
1 l0
>
otherwise
i j
> l 00 l 00
<
>
>
>
>
where the factor :
0 0
i j
l l
=
(B.17)
0
l;l
j0
1li00 l0
is called Line Outage Distribution Factor (LODF) which establishes the relationship between the
pre-outage real ow fl0 on line l0 and the change fl on the real ows on line l = l 0 due to the
0
i
outage of line l with 0
j0
g 6
fl = l;l0 fl0 . Note that 0
= 1 only when l is a cutset of the
l l0 f
network. In that case, the outage of line l breaks the system into two separate
subnetworks and the ISDFs needs to be redened for each subnetwork.
B.2.2 Closure of a line

Another example is the addition of a line l0 = (i0; j0). Two possible situations of interest are:
1. l0 is a radial line with i0 = whose addition results in ~ = L [ l and ~ = N [
0
i0. We may
2N L N
apply equations (B.13) and (B.14) to construct the augmented ISDF matrix
0
" i # (B.18)
~= 0T
1
i0
where of
, the column j0
0
= j .
2 N whose addition results in ~ L[
2. l0 is a new line with i0; j0 = l0. We dene a new ISDF
row vector ~T L
T T
l0 = al 0 B = bl0 a~l 0 B and construct the augmented (L + 1) N ISDF matrix
" ~ T T
~= l 0 + l 0 # (B.19)
+
0 0
i j
where T is determined by T l l T
l0
and each row of
l =1 i 0 0
l0 .
l 0 lj0
Appendix C
Slack bus modeling in load ow

solutions
Power ow analysis is a basic tool for power system studies. In a traditional power ow with
a single slack bus model, one generator bus is selected to be the voltage phase angle
reference and balances the power mismatch due to uncertain system loss. Without the
angle reference bus, that is, if all buses are included in the Newton-Raphson formulation,
the Jacobian matrix will certainly be singular: so the slack bus allows the solution of the
non-linear set of power ow equations to be feasible. The loss-compensating characteristic
of the slack bus means that total losses are assigned to only one slack bus: in fact, since
the power losses in the network are not known in advance, to maintain the real power
balance in the system one cannot specify the real power generated at all generators.
However, in the actual operation of electric power systems there is no single slack bus, instead
there are many generators distributed geographically throughout the system which take on the
function of a slack bus. So the concept of slack bus, as the voltage phase angle reference, is a
mathematical necessity but its loss-compensating characteristic has no physical relationship to
any generator bus. Exception arises when a small system is linked to a much bigger system via
a single tie line (single bus). In this case, one can represent the large system with an
equivalent generator, which can hold the voltage constant and generate as much power as
needed, i. e. the slack bus features. For instance, in a distribution network fed by a substation,
the transmission network acts as a slack bus with respect to the distribution network.
In the light of these considerations, a distributed slack bus power ow is a better tool,
even if the adoption of a single slack bus usually does not represent a problem in a
well dened deterministic load ow problem.
C.1 Single slack bus power ow

The load ow real power equations in a single slack bus model are [114]:
Pi = P i Ci Pi( 1; : : : ; n 1; Vm+1; : : : ; Vn 1) i 2 [1; n 1]

(C.1)
Ps = P s Cs Ps( 1; : : : ; n 1; Vm+1; : : : ; Vn 1) + Pimb
174
APPENDIX C. SLACK BUS MODELING IN LOAD FLOW SOLUTIONS 175
where:
buses 1; : : : ; m are P-V buses, buses m + 1; : : : ; n 1 are P-Q buses, and bus n is
the slack bus;
Pi is the real power mismatch at bus i;
P i and Ci are the real power generation and the real load at bus i respectively;
Pi( 1; : : : ; n 1; Vm+1; : : : ; Vn 1) is the sum of the real power ows on the branches connected
to bus i: it is a function of the voltage phase angles and magnitudes;
P
imb is the real power unbalance due to uncertain power losses.
Denote the vector of the real power unknowns by:
T (C.2)
= [ 1; 2; : : : ; m; m+1; : : : ; n 1; Pimb]
By linearizing the system (C.1) around the equilibrium point:

P @P P i 2 [1; n 1]
Pi = n 1 i imb
j=1
@ jj + 0
(C.3)
@P
n 1 s
P @ j j + 1 Pimb
Ps = j=1
The load ow real power equations, that can be solved by the Newton-Raphson method, can be
formulated as follows:
2 @1 @
@2 n 1 03
6 @P1 @P1 @P1 7
P1 @P2 @P2 @P1 1
2 P2 3 6 0 7 3
6 @1 @2 @n 1 7
2
2
6 7
6 .. 7 = 6 . . . . . 7 . 7
. . . . . . (C.4)
6
. 6 . . . . . 7 .
6 Pn 7 6 @Pn @Pn @Pn 7 6 n 1 7
6 1 7 6 1 1 1
0
7 6
6 7
P
6 7 6 7 7
6 7 6 7 6 7
6 Ps 7 6 @1 @2 @n 1 7 6 imb 7
6 7 6 7 6 7
4 5 6
1 7 4 5
@Ps @Ps @Ps
6 7
66 @ 1 @ 2 @n 1
7
7
4 5
Figure C.1 shows the ow-chart of a single slack bus load ow procedure. At each
iteration the load ow Jacobian is updated and the new system state is determined. The
voltage phase angles i, the voltage magnitudes Vi, and the slack bus injection As are
updated, after calculating the real and reactive state variables ( i and Vi):
(k+1) (k) (k) i 2 [1; n 1]
i = i + i
(k+1) (k) (k) i 2 [m + 1; n 1] (C.5)
Vi = Vi + Vi
( k+1) ( k)
As =As + Pimb(k)
The convergence is achieved when the real and reactive power mismatches are lower than the given
tolerances. At the end, the slack bus power generation has to be updated on the basis of the nal
injection calculated by the procedure:
Ps = As + Cs (C.6)
where P , A , C
s s s are the real power generation, the real power injection, and the real load at the
slack bus respectively.
Usually, the largest generator is arbitrarily proposed as slack in absence of better criteria, which is a
good choice in case the total imbalance is relatively large [115]. Other suggested criteria for single
slack bus selection are [116]: a) have the largest short-circuit current, b) have a large number of
lines connected to it, c) have a voltage leading all other voltages of the system.
C.2 Distributed slack bus power ow

The basic concept is that of dening a small set of generation units which function as the slack
bus to balance the real power mismatch due to uncertain system losses. In particular, it is
distributed to these generation units according to the so called participation factors i.
To introduce the distributed slack bus, the load ow equations have to be properly
modied. So the system (C.1) becomes:
Pi = P i Ci Pi( 1; : : : ; n 1; Vm+1; : : : ; Vn 1) + i Pimb i 2 [1; m]

(C.7)
Pi = P i Ci Pi( 1; : : : ; n 1; Vm+1; : : : ; Vn 1) i 2 [m + 1; n 1]
Ps = P s Cs Ps( 1; : : : ; n 1; Vm+1; : : : ; Vn 1) + s Pimb

By linearizing the system (C.7) around the equilibrium point:
@P
n 1 i
P @j j + i Pimb i 2 [1; m]
Pi = j=1
+ 0 Pimb i 2 [m + 1; n 1]
n 1 @Pi (C.8)
P =P
i j=1 @ j j
@P
n 1 i
P @ + Pimb
Ps = j=1 jj s
Only the last column of the load ow real power Jacobian has to be modied introducing
the participation factors i of those P-V buses that act as the slack bus:
2 @1 @ m+1 1 3
@P1 @P1
. .
2 3 . .7 3
.. ..
P 6
.. 1 ... .. .. 2 .. 1
.
6
6
@P . @P . 7
7
.
6
6
6
P m+1 7 =6
7 6
m+1 ..
m+1
@
.. 07
76
6 m+1 7
7
(C.9)
. 7 6 7 6 . 7
@1 m+1
6 . 7 6 7 6 . 7
6 7 6 .. ..
. . 76 . 7
. .. . .
6 7 . . . . 76 P 7
Ps
6 .
6 7 6 7 6 7
@P s @P s
imb
6 7 6 7 6 7
4 5 6 7 4 5
6 @1
@
m+1 s 7
6 7
4 5
Figure C.1: Flow-chart of a single slack bus load ow
At each iteration the load ow Jacobian, modied according to matrix calculation (C.9), is updated and
the new system state is determined. After calculating the real and reactive state variables ( i and Vi),
not only the voltage phase angles i and the voltage magnitudes Vi, but also the real power
injections at the buses that participate in redistributing the real power losses, are updated:
(k+1) (k) (k) i 2 [1; n 1]

i = i + i
(k+1) (k) (k) i 2 [m + 1; n 1]
Vi = Vi + Vi
(C.10)
( k+1) ( k) (k)
Ai =Ai + i Pimb i 2 [1; m]
( k+1) ( k)
As =As + s Pimb(k)
When the convergence is achieved, the real power generations at the distributed slack
buses have to be updated on the basis of the nal injections calculated by the procedure:
Pi = Ai + Ci i 2 [1; m]
(C.11)
Ps = As + Cs
C.2.1 Participation factors

As explained in the previous paragraph, a distributed slack bus is modelled using
scalar participa-tion factors to assign the unknown system loss to the participating
sources. In the distributed slack bus model, the system real power losses are treated
as an unknown and distributed to participating sources according to their assigned
participation factors. The sum of all participation factors is one:
N
gen
X
(C.12)
i =1
i=1
where N
gen is the number of generation units that participate in balancing the power mismatch due
to uncertain system loss.
There are several methods to calculate the participation factors. The rst one, which is also
the simplest, denes the participation factor i as follows:
i = P (C.13)
max i
P N
where P max i is the maximum real power by
i=1
gen
P i
max i
generation unit .
Another method considers the participation factors of each generator to the economic
load dispatch (ELD).
Appendix D
Devices for reactive power support
The devices that provide reactive power support can be divided into two categories, static and
dynamic. Static devices can only be switched on and o manually if they are installed with
switching abilities. They deliver a xed amount of reactive power when switched on and they are
only capable of limited switching operations. They are therefore not able to respond to reactive
power needs instantaneously. Dynamic devices are instead capable of regulating their reactive
output according to requirements for voltage levels in real-time. The dynamic nature of reactive
support devices is much more desirable and so more valuable than the output from static ones,
which are more applicable in dealing with seasonal uctuations in reactive power demand or in
supplying basic, invariable load at specic points in the system [43].
D.1 Synchronous generators

Most generators connected to the electricity grid are synchronous generators.
Generator settings can be adjusted to produce combinations of real and reactive
power. When the generator increases its reactive power output, its real power
capability may need to be reduced if the generator reaches its limits.
A generator's output capabilities depend on the thermal limits of various parts of the generator
and on system stability limits. Thermal limits are physical limits of materials such as copper,
iron and insulation; if the generator overheats, insulation begins to degrade and over time this
could result in equipment damage. Increasing real power output of a generator heats up the
armature. Increasing reactive power output heats up the eld windings and the armature. To
supply reactive power, the generator must increase the magnetic eld to raise the voltage that it
is supplying to the power system; this means increasing the current in the eld windings, which
is limited by the thermal properties of the metal and insulation. The eld current is supplied by
the generator exciter, which is a DC power supply connected to the generator. The eld current
can be quickly adjusted by automatic control or with a dial to change the reactive power
supplied or consumed by the generator. Stability limits are determined by the ability of the
power system to accept delivery of power from the connected generator under a dened set of
system conditions including recognized contingencies. All generators connected to a power
system operate at the same electrical frequency; if a generator loses synchronism with the rest
of the system, it will trip o-line to protect itself.
Figure D.1 is an example of a generator capability set, or curve. Due to the shape of the boundary,
179
APPENDIX D. DEVICES FOR REACTIVE POWER SUPPORT 180
Figure D.1: An example of synchronous generator output capability curve [117]
it is referred to as a D-curve. It has three components, labeled eld heating limit, armature heating
VI
t a, centered at the origin, and expressed by
limit and core-end heating limit.

The armature current limit is a circle with a
radius the following equation:
2 2 2 (D.1)
PG + QG (VtIa)
The eld current limit, on the other hand, is a circle with radius Xs at 0; t !
X s and expressed
VE 2
t f V
by the following equation:
Vt
2 2 VE 2
t f
2
P G + QG + ! ! (D.2)
Xs Xs
where:
P
G is the real power generation of the synchronous generator;

Q
G is the reactive power generation of the synchronous generator;

V
t is the terminal voltage of the synchronous generator at which its capability curves are
calculated;
I
ais the rated armature current of the synchronous generator at which its capability
curves are calculated;
E
f is the excitation voltage of the synchronous generator;
X
s is the synchronous reactance of the synchronous generator.
The core-end heating limit constrains the generator's capabilities in under-excited mode.
Reactive power supply from generators requires a minimal additional amount of fuel or real power
from the network. The cost of a generator depends on the capacity, fuel type and voltage level.
Because the reactive power constraints in generators are thermal and equipment takes some time
to heat to the point of degradation, generators are designed to provide signicantly increased
amounts of reactive power output for short periods. A generator can increase or decrease reactive
power output smoothly and almost instantaneously within its designed capabilities. Generators have
a longer response time if the real power output needs to be adjusted or the generator is o-line; the
generator ramp rate and start-up time will determine how quickly the generator can adjust its
reactive power output in these situations. Generators have high maintenance costs due to their
moving mechanical parts and cooling systems.
D.2 Distributed generators

Distributed generators are small power sources including microturbines, fuel cells and engine gen-
erators connected to lower-voltage electric distribution systems. They may be owned by utilities or
by customers, and are often owned by large industrial plants. Distributed generators have the same
reactive power characteristics as large generators, they produce dynamic reactive power and the
amount of reactive power does not necessarily decrease when voltage decreases. The reactive
power output can be quickly adjusted within the generator operating limits, but will require more time
if the generator needs to be started or its real power output needs to be adjusted. The major
advantage of distributed generators is that they provide reactive power capability locally, often at the
site of large loads, reducing reactive power losses in transmission lines [118].
D.3 Synchronous condensers

Synchronous condensers are another type of dynamic reactive support device. They are
basically unloaded synchronous generators, i. e. they run without a prime mover or a
mechanical load. They deliver reactive power at leading or lagging power factor as their static
counterparts, but they possess many advantages over static devices. The most important is
their ability to continuously handle uctuating local demand for reactive power and their reactive
output is not aected by system voltage conditions. Power factor correction with synchronous
condensers also provides lower line losses and so helps the real power transmission. They are
rotating machines with moving parts and therefore need signicantly more maintenance than
their static alternatives accompanied by maintenance costs.
D.4 Supervar machines

Supervar machines are rotating machines, much like motors and generators, that use high
tem-perature superconductor technology. They serve as reactive power shock absorbers for
the grid, dynamically delivering or absorbing reactive power, depending on the voltage level of
the trans-mission system. They are specically designed for continuous, steady-state dynamic var
support while having multiples of their rated output in reserve for transient problems.
D.5 Shunt capacitors

Capacitor batteries can be either switched or xed to the power grid although the latter is not very
desirable unless a basic, invariable local reactive power demand is present at the bus or its
surroundings. Switched capacitor banks are nonetheless considered static devices due to their
reactive power output being unadjustable whilst switched on. In addition, their reactive output is
proportional to the square of the bus voltage. This causes the output of a capacitor to be low during
low voltage periods when extra reactive power is likelier to be needed more, rendering the capacitor
less useful. Their advantages are that they can be bundled up to match the static reactive power
demand and individually added, removed, and replaced as needed. They are also light, most often
free of any required cooling and are relatively inexpensive on their own.
D.6 Shunt reactors

Shunt reactors, like their capacitor counterparts, can be either switched or xed to the
grid. Reactors have the opposite eect to that of capacitors: they absorb reactive power
from the power grid. They are mainly used to compensate for the line capacitance in
long overhead transmission lines and cable systems. Their purpose is to keep the
voltage from rising during light load periods by absorbing excess local reactive power.
D.7 Series capacitors

Series compensation is based on controlled insertion and removal of series capacitors
in AC trans-mission lines. Series capacitors provide reactive power to the power
system according to the square of the line current: the higher the line current, the
more reactive power support. Due to charac-teristics of the impedance of a series
capacitor compared to that of the line impedance, a series compensated transmission
line is electrically reduced to a shorter distance, so increasing its transfer capability.
D.8 Flexible AC Transmission Systems (FACTS)

FACTS are technologies that increase exibility of transmission systems by allowing control of power
ows and increasing stability limits of transmission lines. There are several varieties of FACTS
devices. Some of the FACTS devices for reactive power management are static var com-pensators
(SVC), static synchronous compensators (STATCOM), static synchronous series com-pensator
(SSSC), dynamic var (D-var), distributed superconducting magnetic energy storage (D-SMES),
unied power ow controller (UPFC), and interline power ow controller (IPFC) [119].
D.8.1 Static Var Compensators

Static var compensators (SVCs) are basically shunt capacitors and reactors connected to the grid
through and controlled by thyristors. They therefore possess many of the same physical char-acteristics
as static capacitor banks. They are however regarded as dynamic control because of the addition of the
fast switching capabilities of the thyristors brings dynamic properties to the compensators.
D.8.2 Static Synchronous Compensators

Static synchronous compensators (STATCOMs) are devices that use power electronic
technology to synthesize reactive output to the grid. They convert a DC voltage source to a 3-
phased output at system frequency with capabilities to control both amplitude and phase-angle
of the output. STATCOMs are made to both generate and absorb reactive power and because
of the power electronics utilization the output range is symmetric, i. e. equal generation and
consumption capa-bilities. The response time of the STATCOM is similar to that of the SVC, but
the STATCOM's reactive output is not as sensitive to voltage degradation as the SVC's since
the output of the STATCOM falls linearly with voltage instead of proportionally to the square of
the voltage. In addition, a STATCOM device is slightly less space consuming than an SVC, but
the STATCOMs are slightly more expensive.
D.8.3 Static Synchronous Series Compensators

The Static Synchronous Series Compensator (SSSC) is a series device of the Flexible AC Trans-
mission Systems (FACTS) family using power electronics to control power ow and improve power
oscillation damping on power grids. The SSSC injects a voltage in series with the transmission line
º
where it is connected, 90 phase-shifted with the load current, operating as a controllable series
capacitor. The basic dierence, as compared with series capacitor, is that the voltage injected by an
SSSC is not related to the line current and can be independently controlled.
D.8.4 D-var (Dynamic Var)

D-var voltage regulation systems dynamically regulate voltage levels on power transmission grids
and in industrial facilities; D-var is a type of STATCOM. D-var dynamic voltage regulation systems
detect and instantaneously compensate for voltage disturbances by injecting leading or lagging re-
active power to the part of the grid to which the D-var is connected. D-var systems provide dynamic
var support for transmission grids that experience voltage sags, which are typically caused by high
concentrations of inductive loads, usually in industrial manufacturing centers, or from weaker por-
tions of the transmission grid, typically in remote areas or at the end of radial transmission lines. D-
var systems also are suited to address the need for dynamic var support at wind farms.
D.8.5 Distributed SMES (D-SMES)

A superconducting magnetic energy storage (SMES) system is a device for storing and
instanta-neously discharging large quantities of power. A distributed-SMES (D-SMES)
system is a new application of proven SMES technology that enables utilities to improve
system reliability and transfer capacity. D-SMES is a shunt-connected Flexible AC
Transmission (FACTS) device de-signed to increase grid stability, improve power transfer
and increase reliability. Unlike other FACTS devices, D-SMES injects real power as well as
dynamic reactive power to more quickly compensate for disturbances on the utility grid.
D.8.6 Unied Power Flow Controllers

A Unied Power Flow Controller (UPFC) is an electrical device for providing fast-acting reactive power
compensation on high-voltage electricity transmission networks. The UPFC is a versatile
controller which can be used to control real and reactive power ows in a transmission line. The
concept of UPFC makes it possible to handle practically all power ow control and transmission
line compensation problems, using solid state controllers, which provide functional exibility,
generally not attainable by conventional thyristor controlled systems. The UPFC is a
combination of a static synchronous compensator (STATCOM) and a static synchronous series
compensator (SSSC) coupled via a common DC voltage link. It is capable of controlling
simultaneously or selectively, all the parameters aecting the power ow in a transmission line.
The parameters usually are voltage, impedance, and phase angle.
D.8.7 Interline Power Flow Controllers

An Interline Power Flow Controller (IPFC) consists of two series voltage sources converters
(VSCs) whose DC capacitors are coupled, allowing real power to circulate between dierent
power lines. When operating below its rated capacity, the IPFC is in regulation mode, allowing
the regulation of the P and Q ows on one line, and the P ow on the other line. In addition, the
net real power generation by the two coupled VSCs is zero, neglecting power losses.
D.9 Wind generators

The intermittent nature of wind power generation is particularly challenging when it comes
to power system operations. The uncontrollable operations of windmill farms make it di-cult
to assign any denite reactive power supply to the generators, especially older windmills,
which are commonly equipped with asynchronous generators. Such generators do not
contribute any reactive power to the grid but rather deliver power at lagging power factor
meaning that they draw reactive power from the grid. Newer installations are equipped
with xed capacitor banks or power electronics like SVCs at their grid connection point.
D.10 User plants

All user plants connected to the network may contribute to voltage regulation,
absorbing power with a power factor greater than a certain minimum value. This goal,
technically attainable by correcting the power factor, can be easily achieved by means
of the same static devices used in the transmission network, mainly capacitors.
D.11 Transmission lines

Electric transmission lines have both capacitive and inductive properties. The line capacitance
supplies reactive power, while the line inductance consumes reactive power. At a loading
known as Surge Impedance Loading (SIL), the reactive power supplied by the line capacitance
equals the reactive power consumed by the line inductance, meaning that the line provides
exactly the amount of Mvar needed to support its voltage. Lines loaded above SIL consume
reactive power, while lines loaded below SIL supply reactive power. The amount of reactive
power consumed by a line is related to the current owing on the line or the voltage drop along the
line; the amount of reactive power supplied by a line is related to the line voltage.
When an overhead transmission line is lightly loaded, the capacitance of the line
generates more reactive power than is absorbed by the inductive component and the line
generates reactive power. If the line becomes heavily loaded, the inductive reactance
starts to absorbs more reactive power than the capacitive component generates. This
results in the line overall consuming reactive power and therefore reactive power has to be
supplied to the line in order to maintain a decent voltage prole.
The capacitances have greater eect at higher voltage levels. Because of the capacitive nature
of HV transmission cables the inductive component of the conductors generally never absorbs
more reactive power than the shunt capacitances manage to generate. Cables therefore
generate reactive power which often has to be compensated to maintain voltage levels.
D.11.1 High voltage DC transmission lines

High voltage DC transmission lines (HVDC) transmit power via DC (direct current). Because
DC transmission lines are transmitting power at zero hertz, the reactive power consumption on
the line is zero. The converters require reactive power for the conversion process typically in
the range of 40% of the power rating of each of the converter terminals. The reactive power is
required to compensate for the reactive power consumption in the converter transformers and
to maintain an acceptable AC voltage level on the AC side of the converter terminals. Much of
this reactive power requirement is provided by shunt capacitors and lters. Therefore, a properly
designed HVDC system is essentially self-su-cient in reactive power.
D.12 Transformers
Transformers are electromagnetic devices that convert power from one voltage level
to another; they are inductive devices and therefore consume reactive power.
D.12.1 Transformer taps

Large power transformers are generally equipped with voltage tap changers, with tap
settings to control the voltages either on the primary or secondary sides of the transformer
by changing the amount and direction of reactive power ow through the transformers 1. Tap
changers do not consume or supply reactive power; taps force voltage on one side of the
transformer up, at the expense of lowering the voltage on the other side. Taps can be
thought of as pumping reactive power from one side of the transformer to the other to
regulate voltage. The tap changers can be controlled to automatically adjust to system
conditions. Transformers can be categorized as semi-dynamic reactive power support
devices. They deliver continuous voltage control, however, they are slow in doing so.
D.12.2 Phase Shifting Transformers

Phase Shifting Transformers (PSTs), also called Phase Angle Regulators (PARs), allow system
operators to control real power ow. Phase shifting transformers have taps that control the phase
angle dierence across the transformer. Increasing the phase angle dierence across a transformer
has the eect of increasing the impedance of the line, which will reduce the amount of real power
1
They are called OLTC transformers (On Load Tap Changing
transformers).
on the line. Phase shifting transformers are usually installed to control real power ow,
especially along parallel paths. Phase shifting transformers are also a useful tool for
reactive power control. Controlling the real power ow along a line allows for control of
the reactive power consumed or produced by the line.
D.13 Dierences among equipment types

Generators, synchronous condensers, SVCs, and STATCOMs all provide fast, continuously control-
lable reactive support and voltage control. OLTC transformers provide nearly continuous voltage
control but they are slow. Because the transformer moves reactive power from one bus to an-other,
the control gained at one bus is at the expense of the other. Capacitors and inductors are not
variable and oer control only in large steps. An unfortunate characteristic of capacitors and
capacitor-based SVCs is that output drops dramatically when voltage is low and support is needed
most. The output of a capacitor, and the capacity of an SVC, is proportional to the square of the
terminal voltage. STATCOMs provide more support under low-voltage conditions than do capacitors
or SVCs because they are current-limited devices and their output drops linearly with voltage. The
output of rotating machinery (i. e. generators and synchronous condensers) rises with dropping
voltage unless the eld current is actively reduced. Generators and synchronous condensers
generally have additional emergency capacity that can be used for a limited time.
Voltage-control characteristics favour the use of generators and synchronous condensers. Costs, on
the other hand, favour capacitors. Generators have extremely high capital costs because they are
designed to produce real power, not reactive power. Even the incremental cost of obtaining reactive
support from generators is high, although it is di-cult to unambiguously separate reactive-power
costs from real-power costs. Operating costs for generators are high as well because they involve
real-power losses. Finally, because generators have other uses, they experience opportunity costs
when called upon to simultaneously provide high levels of both reactive and real power.
Synchronous condensers have the same costs as generators; but, because they are built solely to
provide reactive support, their capital costs do not include the prime mover or the balance of plant
and they incur no opportunity costs. SVCs and STATCOMs are high-cost devices, as well, although
their operating costs are lower than those for synchronous condensers and generators [117].
Table D.1: Characteristics of voltage-control equipment [43]
Dierences in eectiveness and costs of the dierent devices dictate that reactive power generally
is provided by a mix of static and dynamic devices. The cost of reactive power service depends
upon the choice of equipment. The costs of satisfying static reactive power demands are much
lower than those of satisfying dynamic reactive power demands. While capital costs tend to
dominate, the costs of providing reactive power also include generator fuel costs, operating
expenses and the opportunity costs from not generating real power. The capital costs of static
sources of reactive power, such as capacitors, are orders of magnitude lower than the capital
costs of dynamic sources, such as generators, SVCs, and synchronous condensers.
Table D.1 shows the speed of response, voltage support and costs for the dierent sources
of reactive powers and does not include transformer tap changers. The ability to support
voltage means the ability to produce reactive power when voltage is falling. The availability
of voltage support indicates how quickly a device can change its reactive power supply or
consumption. Disruption is low for devices that can smoothly change reactive power
output and high for devices that cannot change reactive power output smoothly [43].
Appendix E
Italian hierarchical voltage control
The hierarchical voltage control scheme, presented in Chapter 3 and shown in Figure E.1, provides
closed-loop real-time regulation of voltages at the main buses (pilot nodes) of the transmission
network, through coordinated control of the reactive power resources associated with each pilot
node (control area), mainly those of generators (control plants). The most signicant levels of this
hierarchical control realize the Secondary and Tertiary Voltage Regulations (SVR and TVR). SVR is
a decentralized control scheme which automatically maintains the pilot node voltage at its set-point,
through the adjustment of the reactive powers of local control generators and compensators: this
area level control has a dominant time constant of 50 s.With a slower dynamics, SVR [80, 99] can
also switch local shunt reactors/capacitor banks and control OLTCs and SVCs. Conversely, TVR
[96, 98] acts on the overall transmission network, with a dominant time constant of about 5 min,
automatically updating all the pilot nodes voltage set-points. TVR aims at both minimizing network
losses and improving operation voltage security.
The hierarchical voltage control scheme is very simple in comparison with other
theoretical and unrealistic centralized schemes due to the small number of EHV
controlled buses and telecommu-nication requirements. Notwithstanding the pursued
objective of system complexity minimization, the eort to achieve an eective control
system is still considerable, especially for large transmission networks.
E.1 Secondary Voltage Regulation

E.1.1 SART apparatus
SART1 [120] regulates the units' reactive power or local EHV bus-bar voltage by controlling the AVR
set-points and sharing out total generated reactive power among power plant units in a balanced
way. In the rst control mode, SART regulates the reactive powers of local generators, according to
the reactive level received from the Regional Voltage Regulator. In the second mode, it regulates
the local high-side bus-bar voltage on the basis of a suitable daily voltage trend or an operator-
dened set-point. In both these control modes, the reactive power of each generator is controlled
through a closed loop whose set-point is obtained by multiplying the reactive level signal by the
generator's reactive power limit. Over/under excitation unit reactive limits are computed, in real-time,
as a function of the actual values of real power and voltage, also taking into account
1
In the past it was called REPORT.
188
APPENDIX E. ITALIAN HIERARCHICAL VOLTAGE CONTROL 189
Figure E.1: Hierarchical voltage control for the Italian EHV system
the actual operating conditions of the generator cooling system.

SART recognizes particular network contingencies (power plant islanding, local bus-bars isolation,
etc.) in real-time on the basis of local information and chooses the most suitable control mode
accordingly. It also adapts the regulation parameters according to the identied equivalent external
reactance seen from the bus-bar (network side). Under steady-state operating conditions, the
reactive level signal is limited between minimum and maximum excitation. During transients these
limits can be exceeded, according to the generators' overloading capabilities, thus permitting the
highest network support in response to heavy perturbations. SART's dynamic behaviour is
characterized by dominant time constants of about 5 s and 50 s for unit reactive power and EHV
bus-bar voltage control respectively. The reactive power gradient is limited on the basis of generator
constraints in the case of major perturbations.
E.1.2 RVR apparatus

RVR [95] is installed at the regional control centers. It regulates at the same time, but
with independent and parallel operation, the voltages of its pilot nodes through real-
time remote control of the reactive power productions of those power plants with the
greatest impact on pilot node voltages. For this purpose, RVR denes and updates the
value of its area reactive power levels through a separate voltage regulator for each
pilot node in the region, whose main characteristics are:

the regulation law is of the proportional-integral type, with an adaptive control algorithm
which keeps loop dynamics unchanged in real-time, taking into account the number and
actual capabilities of the plants participating in pilot node voltage regulation, as well as
the equivalent external reactance experienced by the pilot node;

full dynamic de-coupling among dierent pilot node voltage control loops within the
same region, to avoid oscillations of reactive power between neighboring areas:
for this purpose it is also possible to select a positive, null or negative static droop
for pilot node voltage regulation;

each pilot node voltage regulator can be started without any preliminary manual alignment of
control generator voltages, and its set point value can be determined locally by either the
manual calibrator (manual local reference) or the stored proles (automatic local reference).
Otherwise it is received by remote from TVR. Tracking functions among pilot node voltage
calibrators and corresponding controlled magnitudes enable switching between the RVR's
dierent operation modes at any time without causing noise for controlled variables.
For each area, one or two vicarious pilot nodes can be chosen to deal with possible tele-measurement
equipment failures at the main pilot node. The conguration of the control system in the region can be also
modied taking into account network changes and in response to requests coming from TVR. The
regulation areas can be congured on-line in terms of control plants (participating in pilot node voltage
control), peripheral plants (performing local high-side voltage control), stations reactive reserves under
SVR control, and control law parameters. In particular network congurations, some control plants may
gravitate to an area close to that they electrically belong to, due to their geographic position. These
boundary plants, considered peripheral ones in the initial conguration, can either participate in tele-control
of their pilot nodes or of the neighboring ones, as the grid con guration varies. In the automatic operation
mode, based on local reference, the set-point value
of each pilot node voltage is automatically updated on the basis of a voltage prole
associated with the current day and stored in the RVR. The voltage daily generic prole
consists of 96 values corresponding to the set-point values to put into operation every
quarter of an hour. During such an interval, the reference of the pilot node voltage is
automatically updated every minute, on the basis of a tracking ramp, from the current
reference value to that foreseen for the start of the subsequent quarter of an hour.
E.2 Tertiary Voltage Regulation

E.2.1 NVR apparatus
NVR [121] includes the real-time regulator TVR and the optimal forecasting controller LMC.
TVR has two main objectives: minimizing network losses and increasing load margins in the
transmission network in response to heavy operating conditions (critical from the voltage
stability viewpoint). These goals are basically achieved by proper coordination between the
TVR and the SVR: TVR establishes network voltages by updating the voltage set-points
optimization of the pilot nodes, at any cycle. The TVR uses the last available minimum losses
ORPF as the voltages-reactive powers reference and achieves minimum feasible losses by
minimizing a real-time control function OF (see equation (E.6)).
The load margin is maximized by the automatic and real-time coordinated control contemporarily
exercised by SVR on all reactive resources, according to the SVR control philosophy. In terms of
stability, TVR and RVRs operate to prevent units from reaching their over-excitation limits: in the
presence of the TVR, this condition is in fact related to the tap-changer reverse action which
normally anticipates the triggering of the voltage collapse mechanism. Whenever the reactive power
control margins made available to SVR are strongly reduced as a result of severe perturbations or
abnormal load patterns, the TVR attends the grid voltage reduction to the minimum allowed by the
operating conditions, progressively renouncing the not applicable optimal forecasted grid voltage
prole. The TVR will therefore avoid the risk of instability by allowing the power plants under SVR to
operate at their capability limits only when transmission network voltages are very low even though
all the network's reactive power resources are engaged for voltage support. In this way there is a
reduced risk of the triggering of a voltage collapse in response to intervention of over-excitation
limits, and the overall loadability of the transmission system is increased.
The second NVR main function is achieved by the LMC controller, which denes the optimal forecast
voltage plan required as input by the TVR. This very slow o-line ORPF computing is the main LMC
activity, taking into account the estimation of system state and the constraints determined by the
hierarchical structure of the SVR and its control ties (pilot nodes and control power plants). On the
basis of a forecasted state estimation, LMC computes in advance (i. e. the day before) the
provisional optimal voltage and reactive power plan, which is stored and used by the TVR. If the
TVR recognizes signicant dierences between expected and real system operating conditions, it
requires the LMC to compute the updated optimal forecasted voltage plan based on the last system
state estimation (which, in the best case, could refer to about ve minutes before). This delayed ORPF
will be continuously computed by LMC every state estimation update and sent to the TVR until the
stored and new optimal forecasted voltage plans resemble each other. In addition, the LMC shows and
compares, for each area, on-progress daily traces of the pilot node voltage and required set-point, the
reactive power levels operating on the plants and the optimal
forecasted references used by the TVR.
E.3 Control system algorithms and dynamics design

In the hierarchical voltage control system, the inner loop is typically faster than the outer one, in
such a way as to achieve substantial dynamic de-coupling between overlapped levels. In other
words, the time-decomposition criterion requires that the dominant time constant of any
external control loop be higher than the dominant time constants of all its internal loops. Such a
criterion is applied to unit voltage regulation, unit reactive power control, EHV bus voltage
regulation, pilot node voltage regulation, and pilot nodes voltage set-point optimization:

AVR closes the conventional unit voltage control loop, which is basically of the
proportional-integral type. It is characterized by closed-loop dynamics dominated
by a time constant of about 0.5 s.

Unit reactive power control within SART denes, in closed-loop and real-time, the AVR voltage
set-point VREF in the range between minimum Vmin and maximum value Vmax, which obtains the
unit reactive power production QG corresponding to its reference value
Q
REF :
Z t (QREF QG) dt Vmax (E.1)

VREF = KIQ
0 V
min
where K
IQ is the regulator integral gain, tuned in such a way that the closed loop has a
dominant time constant of 5 s. The fastest AVR dynamic responses, mainly required in
reactive
response to major local network perturbations, are then not signicantly aected by the
power loop. The reference value Q power
REF is obtained from the product of the reactive
level q by the unit capability limit Q
LEV LIM , computed on-line according to the actual
operating conditions of the electrical generator and cooling system:
Q =q Q (E.2)
REF LEV LIM
The reactive power level q

LEV may be provided by the local EHV bus-bar voltage regulator (SART

in high-side voltage control) or by the pilot node voltage regulator (RVR control).
Both of them dene, in closed-loop and real-time, the reactive level qLEV in the interval
between its minimum qmin = 100% and maximum value qmax = +100%, which achieves the
EHV bus-bar or pilot node voltage VP corresponding to its reference value VP REF :
qLEV = KP V (VP REF VP ) + KIV Z 0t (VP REF VP ) dt qmin (E.3)
q
max
where K and K
PV IV are the regulator proportional and integral gains respectively,
tuned in such a way that the closed loop has minimum-phase and a dominant
time constant of 50 s. The fastest contribution to the dynamic responses is
properly given by proportional correction.
The pilot node voltage set-point VP REF may be provided by the local daily trend (RVR automatic setting) or by the regional dispatcher

operator (RVR manual setting) or voltage
set-point optimization (TVR output). The latter denes the most appropriate pilot
node voltage set-points VP REF for secure/e-cient operation, on the basis of an
integral law of the optimal variations VP REF with respect to the present voltage
values VP :
hR t 2 2 2 1 2 0 i (E.4)
V =K Q +R S Q V V dt + P REF IT 0 P P VP min
V
P max
hR t 1 i
+KIT 0 Q 2 + R 2S 2 R2S 1 qLEV qLEV0 dt VP min
V
P max
where K
IT is the regulator integral gain, tuned in such a way that the closed loop
has a dominant time constant of 5 min, and S is the sensitivity matrix between
area reactive levels qLEV and pilot node voltages VP REF
V =S q (E.5)
P REF LEV
Relation (E.4) integrates the result of the TVR objective function minimization, which is based on the
actual network state estimation and the forecasted optimal voltages and reactive powers plan:
0T 2 0 (E.6)
OF = VP + VP REF VP Q VP + VP REF VP +
1 0 T 2 1 0 0
+ qLEV + S VP REF qLEV R qLEV + S VP REF qLEV
where [VP ] and [qLEV ] are the vectors of pilot node voltages and area reactive power levels; VP
and qLEV0 are the vectors of the optimal forecasted pilo t node voltages and area reactive power
levels; Q2 and R2 are weight matrices whose selection allows bestowing a privilege on pilot node
voltage dierences, rather then on the eort of control area reactive power levels. The
compromise reached by TVR, when the available optimal forecasted plan does not t the real
situation, should properly consist in the achievement of the highest voltage plan consistent with
real operating conditions, which minimize network losses as much as is feasible. To achieve
this result it is necessary to preserve system controllability, even if close to the limits, in such a
way as to avoid the disastrous consequences of open-loop operation. In this condition, in fact,
the uncontrolled voltages determine undesired heavy reactive power ows, which increase
system losses and worsen the operation e-ciency. TVR is therefore the correct and necessary
completion of the hierarchical automatic real-time voltage control system.
Bibliography
[1] L. Cabral, Introduction to industrial organization, MIT Press, Cambridge,

Massachusetts (USA), 2000
[2] CESI, Survey on the requirements of the transmission planning process and classication
of the relative indicators, Milan, 2004, in Italian, online at: www. ricercadisistema.it
[3] T.-O. Léautier, Transmission constraints and imperfect markets for power, Journal
of Reg-ulatory Economics, 19:1 27-54, 2001
[4] NERC - North American Electric Reliability Council, Reliability assessment

guidebook ver-sion 1.2, April 2009, online at: www.nerc.com
[5] A. J. Wood and B. F. Wollenberg, Power generation, operation, and control,

Second Edition, John Wiley & Sons, 1996
[6] S. Grijalva and A. M. Visnesky Jr., The eect of generation on network security:
spatial representation, metrics, and policy, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,
Vol. 21, No. 3, August 2006
[7] Ministero delle Attività Produttive, Ministerial Decree April 20, 2005, Concession
of elec-tricity transmission and dispatching in Italy to the company GRTN S.p.A.,
O-cial Gazzette n. 98, April 29, 2005, in Italian
[8] Terna S.p.A., Italian transmission and dispatching grid code, updated version,
January 2010, in Italian, online at: www.terna.it
[9] The Mathworks, MATLAB 7 Getting started guide, online at: www.mathworks.com
[10] R. D. Zimmerman and C. E. Murillo-Sánchez, MATPOWER-A MATLAB power

sys-tem simulation package version 3.2-User's manual, September 21, 2007,
online at: http://www.pserc.cornell.edu/matpower/
[11] P. W. Sauer, On the formulation of power distribution factors for linear load ow
methods, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-100,
No. 2, pp. 764-769, February 1981
[12] W. Y. Ng, Generalized generation distribution factors for power system security
evaluation, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. PAS-100,
No. 3, pp. 1001-1005, March 1981
[13] M. Liu and G. Gross, Role of distribution factors in congestion revenue rights applications,
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 802-810, May 2004
194
BIBLIOGRAPHY 195
[14] M. Liu and G. Gross, Eectiveness of the distribution factor approximations used
in con-gestion modeling, Proceedings of the 14th Power Systems Computation
Conference (PSCC 2002), Sevilla, Spain, June 24-29, 2002
[15] P. W. Sauer, K. E. Reinhard, and T. J. Overbye, Extended factors for linear contingency
analysis, Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2001
[16] M. A. Woodbury, Inverting modied matrices, Memorandum Rept. 42, Statistical

Research Group, Princeton University, Princeton (NJ), 1950
[17] J. Sherman and W. J. Morrison, Adjustment of an inverse matrix corresponding to

a change in one element of a given matrix, Annals of Mathematical Statistics, vol.
21, No. 1, pp. 124-127, 1950
[18] Application of optimization techniques to study power system network performance,

Tech-nical Brochure 122, CIGRE Task Force 38.04.02 Report, October 1997
[19] C. Genesi, P. Marannino, I. Siviero, F. Zanellini, E. M. Carlini, and P. P. Pericolo,

Coor-dinated transmission and generation planning to increase the electricity
market e-ciency, Proceedings of 16th Power Systems Computation Conference
(PSCC 2008), Glasgow, UK, July 14-18, 2008
[20] C. Genesi, P. Marannino, I. Siviero, F. Zanellini, E. M. Carlini, and P. P. Pericolo,

Coor-dinated generation and transmission expansion in the liberalized electricity
market, AEIT, No. 9, pp. 42-49, September 2008, in Italian
[21] T. Güler, G. Gross, and M. Liu, Generalized line outage distribution factors,
Power En-gineering Letters, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 22, No.
2, pp. 879-881, May 2007
[22] C. Genesi, P. Marannino, M. Montagna, S. Rossi, and I. Siviero, Power ow based

indices for the coordination of transmission and generation system planning,
Proceedings of IEEE PowerTech 2009, Bucharest, Romania, June 28-July 2, 2009
[23] Terna S.p.A., Development Plan of the National Electric Transmission Network,
2010, online at: www.terna.it
[24] GME S.p.A. (Gestore dei Mercati Energetici), The Italian electricity market
vademecum, 2009, in Italian, online at: www.mercatoelettrico.org
[25] C. Genesi, P. Marannino, M. Montagna, S. Rossi, I. Siviero, E. M. Carlini, and P.

P. Peri-colo, Impact of network reinforcements on wind power dispatchability,
Convegno Nazionale AEIT 2009, Catania, September 27-29, 2009, in Italian
[26] F. Careri, C. Genesi, P. Marannino, M. Montagna, S. Rossi, and I. Siviero, Wind power
generation and transmission system planning: the Italian case, 15th IEEE Mediterranean
Electrotechnical Conference 2010 (MELECON 2010), Malta, April 25-28, 2010
[27] C. Genesi, P. Marannino, M. Montagna, S. Rossi, I. Siviero, E. M. Carlini, and P.

P. Pericolo, Impact of transmission system expansion on wind generation
dispatchability, L'Energia Elettrica, No. 4, Vol. 87, July-August 2010, in Italian
BIBLIOGRAPHY 196
[28] FERC - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission of the United States of America, Promot-
ing wholesale competition through open access non-discriminatory transmission services
by public utilities, Docket No. RM95-8-000, Order No. 888, Issued April 1996
[29] NERC - North American Electric Reliability Council, Interconnected Operations

Services Working Group (IOSWG) Report, Dening interconnected operations
services under open access, Issued March 1997
[30] Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003
con-cerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing
Directive 96/92/EC, O-cial Journal of the European Union, n. L176/37, July 15, 2003
[31] UCTE - Union for the Co-ordination of Transmission of Electricity, Operation

Handbook, June 2004
[32] EURELECTRIC, Ancillary services: unbundling electricity products ﾧ An

Emerging Mar-ket, February 2004
[33] E. Hirst and B. Kirby, Ancillary services, Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
Technical Report ORNL/CON 310, February 1996
[34] Houston Lighting & Power, Comments to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in
Docket Nos. RM 95-8-000 and RM 94-7-001, Houston, TX, August 1995
[35] Michigan Public Service Commission, Opinion and order after remand, Case
Nos. U-10143 and 10176, Lansing, MI, June 1995
[36] New York Power Pool, New York Power Pool presentation on ancillary services, Prepared for
FERC Dockets RM95-8-000 and RM94-7-001, Schenectady, NY, November 1995
[37] NERC - North American Electric Reliability Council, Interconnected Operations

Services Reference Document, Version 1.0, Princeton, NJ, November 1995
[38] Directive 96/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19

December 1996 con-cerning common rules for the internal market in electricity,
O-cial Journal of the European Union, n. L27, pp. 20-29, January 30, 1997
[39] AEEG - Autorità per l'Energia Elettrica e il Gas, Discipline of the technical and economic
conditions for electricity wheeling and for some network services, regulatory order 13/99,
February 18, 1999, in Italian, online at: www.autorita.energia.it
[40] GRTN - Gestore della Rete di Trasmissione Nazionale, Technical requirements

for connec-tion, v. 3, March 1, 2001, in Italian
[41] AEEG - Autorità per l'Energia Elettrica e il Gas, Rules for the supply of the public
service of electricity despatch and for the provisioning of the necessary resources
following an economic merit order, pursuant to articles 3 and 5 of the legislative
decree n. 79/99, regulatory order 168/03, O-cial Gazette - Ordinary supplement,
n. 16, January 30, 2004, in Italian, online at: www.autorita.energia.it
[42] F. Alvarado, B. Borissov, L. D. Kirsch, and Laurits R. Christensen Associates,

Inc., Reac-tive power as an identiable ancillary service, prepared for
Transmission Administrator of Alberta, Ltd., March 18, 2003
BIBLIOGRAPHY 197
[43] FERC - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission of the United States of America,
Sta Re-port, Principles for e-cient and reliable reactive power supply and
consumption, Docket No. AD05-1-000, February 4, 2005
[44] U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force, Final report on the August 14, 2003 blackout
in the United States and Canada: causes and recommendations, Issued April 2004
[45] J. W. Lamont and J. Fu, Cost analysis of reactive power support, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 890-895, August 1999
[46] A. R. Bergen, Power System Analysis, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1986
[47] J. Zhong and K .Bhattacharya, Toward a competitive market for reactive power, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 1206-1215, November 2002
[48] G. Gross, S. Tao, E. Bompard, and G. Chicco, Unbundled reactive support

service: key characteristics and dominant cost component, IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 283-289, April 2002
[49] I. El-Samahy, K. Bhattacharya, and C. A. Cañizares, A unied framework for reactive power
management in deregulated electricity markets, Proceedings of 2006 IEEE PES Power
Systems Conference and Exposition (PSCE '06), pp. 901-907, October 29-November 1, 2006
[50] NERC - North American Electric Reliability Council, Operating Policy 10 on

Interconnected Operation Services, Draft-3.1, Issued February 2000
[51] NYISO - New York Independent System Operator, Ancillary Services Manual,
Issued March 2008, online at: www.nyiso.com
[52] PJM Interconnection LLC, PJM open access transmission tari, Sixth revised, vol.
1, Issued March 2008, online at: www.pjm.com
[53] CAISO - California Independent System Operator Corporation, Ancillary services

require-ment protocol, FERC electricity tari, First replacement, vol. 2, October
2000, online at: www.caiso.com
[54] IESO - The Independent Electricity Market Operator, Market rules for the Ontario
elec-tricity market, March 2007, online at: www.ieso.ca
[55] NGET - National Grid Electricity Transmission, The Connection and Use
of System Code (CUSC) - Schedule 3, v1.4, Issued November 2007, on-
line at: http://www.nationalgrid.com/NR/rdonlyres/513F95AA-4EBC-468E-BE70-
2FA25FA5CFB0/21627/Sch3v14.pdf
[56] J. Zhong and K. Bhattacharya, Reactive power management in deregulated

power systems - A review, Proceedings of the IEEE Power Engineering Society
Winter Meeting, vol. 2, pp. 1287-1292, January 2002
[57] REE - Red Eléctrica d'España, Procedimientos de Operación del Sistema, online
at: http://www.ree.es
BIBLIOGRAPHY 198
[58] M. A. El-Kady, B. D. Bell, V. F. Carvalho, R. C. Burchett, H. H. Happ, and D. R.
Vierath, Assessment of real-time optimal voltage control, IEEE Transactions on
Power Systems, Vol. 1, pp. 98-107, May 1986
[59] K. R. C. Mamandur and R. D. Chenoweth, Optimal control of reactive power ow for

improvements in voltage proles and for real power loss minimization, IEEE
Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, Vol. 100, pp. 3185-3194, July 1981
[60] J. Qiu and S.M. Shahidehpour, A new approach for minimizing power losses and improving
voltage prole, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 2, pp. 287-295, May 1987
[61] N. Deeb and S. M. Shahidehpour, Linear reactive power optimization in a large

power network using the decomposition approach, IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, Vol. 5, pp. 428-438, May 1990
[62] V. Ajjarapu, P. L. Lau, and S. Battula, An optimal reactive power planning strategy against
voltage collapse, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 9, pp. 906- 917, May 1994
[63] A. Berizzi, P. Bresesti, P. Marannino, G. P. Granelli, and M. Montagna, System-area

op-erating margin assessment and security enhancement against voltage collapse,
IEEE Trans-actions on Power Systems, Vol. 11, pp. 1451-1462, August 1996
[64] C. T. Su and C. T. Lin, Fuzzy-based voltage/reactive power scheduling for voltage

security improvement and loss reduction, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery,
Vol. 16, pp. 319-323, April 2001
[65] N. Grudini, Reactive power optimization using successive quadratic programming

method, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 13, pp. 1219-1225, November 1998
[66] E. Luiz da Silva, J. J. Hedgecock, J. C. O. Mello, and J. C. Ferreira da Luz,

Practical cost-based approach for the voltage ancillary service, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 16, pp. 806-812, November 2001
[67] M. L. Baughman and S. N. Siddiqi, Real time pricing of reactive power: theory and case study
results, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 23-29, February 1991
[68] S. Hao and A. Papalexopoulos, Reactive power pricing and management, IEEE
Transac-tions on Power Systems, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 95-104, October 1997
[69] A. A. El-Keib and X. Ma, Calculating short run marginal costs of active and reactive power
productions, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 559-565, May 1997
[70] S. Ahmed and G. Strbac, A method for simulation and analysis of reactive power market,
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 1047-1052, August 2000
[71] B. J. Gil, T. G. San Roman, J. J. Alba Rios, and P. Sanchez Martin, Reactive power
pricing: a conceptual framework for remuneration and charging procedures, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 483-489, May 2000
[72] K. Bhattacharya and J. Zhong, Reactive power as an ancillary service, IEEE

BIBLIOGRAPHY 199
[73] E. Nobile and A. Bose, A new scheme for voltage control in a competitive
ancillary service market, Proceedings of XIV PSCC Conference, Session 40,
Paper 4, Sevilla (Spain), June 2002
[74] J. Zhong, E. Nobile, A. Bose, and K. Bhattacharya, Localized reactive power

markets using the concept of voltage control areas, IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 1555-1561, 2004
[75] V. L. Paucar and M. J. Rider, Reactive power pricing in deregulated electrical markets
using a methodology based on the theory of marginal costs, Proceedings of the IEEE
Large Engineering Systems Conference on Power Engineering, pp. 7-11, July 2001
[76] P. Lagonotte, J. C. Sabonnariere, J. Y. Leost, and J. P. Paul, Structural analysis

of the electrical system: application to the secondary voltage control in France,
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 4, pp. 479- 486, May 1989
[77] CIGRE WG 38-02-03 ELETTRA - April 1991 Improvement of voltage control
[78] GRTN - Gestore della Rete di Trasmissione Nazionale, Participation to the

voltage control, Technical guide, May 2000, in Italian, online at: www.terna.it
[79] V. Arcidiacono, Automatic voltage and reactive power control in transmission system,
Proceedings of CIGRE-IFAC Survey Paper E, Florence, Italy, September 1983
[80] S. Corsi, The secondary voltage regulation in Italy, in Panel Session - 2000 IEEE
PES Summer Meeting, Seattle, WA, July 16-20, 2000
[81] S. Corsi, M. Pozzi, U. Bazzi, M. Mocenigo, and P. Marannino, A simple real-time

and on-line voltage stability index under test in Italian secondary voltage
regulation, in Proceedings of CIGRE, Paris, France, 2000
[82] J. P. Paul, J. Y. Leost, and J. M. Tesseron, Survey of secondary voltage control in

France: present realization and investigation, IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, Vol. 2, May 1987
[83] H. Lefebvre, D. Fragnier, J. Y. Boussion, P. Mallet, and M. Bulot, Secondary

coordinated voltage control system: feedback of EDF, in Panel Session - 2000
IEEE PES Summer Meeting, Seattle, WA, July 16-20, 2000
[84] J. P. Piret, J. P. Antoine, and M. Subbe, The study of a centralized voltage control method
applicable to the Belgian system, in Proceedings of CIGRE, Paris, France, 1992
[85] J. Van Hecke, N. Janssens, J. Deude, and F. Promel, Coordinated voltage control
experience in Belgium, in Proceedings of CIGRE, Paris, France, 2000
[86] J. L. Sancha, J. L. Fernandez, A. Cortes, and J. T. Abarca, Secondary voltage

control: anal-ysis, solutions, simulation results for the Spanish transmission
system, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 11, pp. 630-638, May 1996
[87] L. Layo, L. Martin, and M. Álvarez, Final implementation of a multilevel strategy

for voltage and reactive control in the Spanish electrical power system, in
Proceedings of PCI Conference, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, 2000
BIBLIOGRAPHY 200
[88] S. Corsi, M. Pozzi, C. Sabelli, and A. Serrani, The coordinated automatic voltage
control of the Italian transmission grid - Part I: reasons of the choice and
overview of the consolidated hierarchical system, IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 1723-1732, November 2004
[89] AEEG - Autorità per l'Energia Elettrica e il Gas, Annex A of the Regulatory Order
Elec-tricity 33/08: Italian technical standard CEI 0-16, Second Edition, July 2008,
in Italian, online at: www.autorita.energia.it
[90] AEEG - Autorità per l'Energia Elettrica e il Gas, Annex A of the Regulatory Order
348/07 - Full regulatory text about electricity taris for transmission, distribution
and metering for the regulatory period 2008-2011, December 29, 2007, in Italian,
online at: www.autorita.energia.it
[91] Italian Interministerial Committee on Prices, Provision 15/93 of 14 December 1993
[92] AEEG - Autorità per l'Energia Elettrica e il Gas, Synthesis of responses to

consultation on electricity taris for transmission, distribution and metering 2008-
2011, October 2007, in Italian
[93] CENELEC - Comité Européen de Normalisation ÉLECtrotechnique, Voltage characteristics of

electricity supplied by public distribution networks, Standard EN 50160, September 2007
[94] S.Corsi, R. Chinnici, R. Lena, G. Vannelli, U. Bazzi, and E. Cima, General application
to the main ENEL's power plants of an advanced voltage and reactive power
regulator for EHV network support, Proceedings of CIGRE, Paris, France, 1998
[95] S. Corsi, V. Arcidiacono, U. Bazzi, R. Chinnici, M. Mocenigo, and G. Moreschini,

The regional voltage regulator for ENEL's dispatchers, Proceedings of CIGRE,
Paris, France, 1996
[96] S. Corsi, P. Marannino, N. Losignore, G. Moreschini, and G. Piccini, Coordination between the
reactive power scheduling and the hierarchical voltage control of the EHV ENEL system, IEEE
[97] A. Berizzi, S. Sardella, F. Tortello, P. Marannino, M. Pozzi, and G. Dell'Olio, The

hier-archical voltage control to face market uncertainties, Proceedings of Bulk
Power System Dynamics and Control, IREP V Conf., Onomichi, Japan, 2001
[98] S. Corsi, M. Pozzi, P. Marannino, F. Zanellini, M. Merlo, and G. Dell'Olio,

Evaluation of load margins with respect to voltage collapse in presence of
secondary and tertiary voltage regulation, Proceedings of Bulk Power Systems
Dynamics and Control, IREP V Conf., Onomichi, Japan, 2001
[99] P. Marannino, F. Zanellini, A. Berizzi, D. Medina, M. Merlo, and M. Pozzi, Steady

state and dynamic approaches for the evaluation of the loadability margins in the
presence of the secondary voltage regulation, Proceedings of MedPower
Conference, Athens, Greece, November 2002
[100] P. Marannino, F. Stefanelli, F. Zanellini, M. Delfanti, and M. Merlo, Impact of real losses and
operational constraints on the reactive support value in presence of a hierarchical voltage
BIBLIOGRAPHY 201
control, Proceedings of IEEE Bologna Power Tech Conference, Bologna, Italy,

June 23-26, 2003
[101]P. Marannino, F. Zanellini, G. Marelli, M. Merlo, and G. Piccini, Assessing the

Mvar generation values to price the reactive support to a hierarchical voltage
control, Proceedings of VI Bulk Power System Dynamics and Control
Symposium, Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy, August 2004
[102] M. Behnke and A. Ellis, Reactive power planning for wind power plant interconnections,
2008 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting - Conversion and Delivery of
Electrical Energy in the 21st Century, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, July 20-24, 2008
[103] CIGRE WG B4.39, Summary of Technical Brochure 370 Integration of large scale wind
generation using HVDC and power electronics, ELECTRA no. 242, February 2009
[104]H. Berndt, M. Hermann, H. D. Kreye, R. Reinsch, U. Scherer, and J. Vanzetta,

Trans-mission Code 2007. Grid and system regulations of the German grid
utilities, Verband der Netzbetreiber VDN e.V.1, 2007, in German
[105] Ordinance on System Services by Wind Energy Plants (System Ser-

vice Ordinance - SDLWindV), 2010, online at: http://www.erneuerbare-
energien.de/les/pdfs/allgemein/application/pdf/sdl_windv_en.pdf
[106] J. M. Rodríguez, O. Alonso, M. Duvison, and T. Domíngez, The integration of renewable

energy and the System Operation: The Special Regime Control Centre (CECRE) in
Spain, 2008 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting - Conversion and Delivery
of Electrical Energy in the 21st Century, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, July 20-24, 2008
[107] AEEG - Autorità per l'Energia Elettrica e il Gas, Regulatory Order Electricity 98/08 on
veri-cation of transmission and dispatching grid code regarding management of wind
generation, July 25, 2008, in Italian, online at: www.autorita.energia.it
[108] Terna S.p.A., Annex A17 of the Italian transmission and dispatching grid code,
Control and protection systems for wind turbine generators - Technical
requirements for connection, August 2008, in Italian, online at: www.terna.it
[109] AEEG - Autorità per l'Energia Elettrica e il Gas, Consultation 25/09 on options for
dis-patching electrical energy produced by non-programmable renewable
sources, July 27, 2009, in Italian, online at: www.autorita.energia.it
[110] E. M. Carlini, P. P. Pericolo, P. Marannino, I. Siviero, and R. Vailati, Impact of wind

gener-ation on the voltage control ancillary service and the development of the Italian
transmission system, CIGRE Session 2010, Paris, France, August 22-27, 2010
[111] V. Arcidiacono, S. Corsi, A. Natale, and C. Raaelli, New developments in the

applications of ENEL transmission system automatic voltage and reactive control,
CIGRE Meeting, Report 38/39-06, Paris, France, 1990
[112] P. Marannino, M. Merlo, G. Piccini, and F. Zanellini, Reactive power support value
and hierarchical voltage control, AEIT, No. 7, July-August 2006, in Italian
BIBLIOGRAPHY 202
[113] F. Careri, C. Genesi, P. Marannino, M. Montagna, S. Rossi, I. Siviero, Denition of

a zonal reactive power market based on the adoption of a hierarchical voltage
control, Proceedings of 7th International Conference on the European Energy
Market (EEM 2010), Madrid, Spain, June 23-25, 2010
[114] Z. Yonggang, Analysis of voltage collapse for applications in real-time, PhD

Thesis in Electrical Engineering, XI Ciclo, Dipartimento di Ingegneria
Elettrotecnica, Politecnico di Milano, in Italian
[115] A. Gómez Expósito, J. L. Martínez Ramos, and J. Riquelme Santos, Slack bus
selection to minimize the system power imbalance in load-ow solutions, IEEE
[116] L. L. Freris and A. M. Sasson, Investigation of the load-ow problem, Proc. IEE,
Vol. 115, No. 10, pp. 1459-1470, October 1968
[117] B. Kirby and E. Hirst, Ancillary service details: Voltage control, Tech. Rep.
ORNL/CON-453, Oak Ridge National Laboratory - Energy Division, December 1997
[118] J. D. Kueck, B. J. Kirby, L. M. Tolbert, and D.T. Rizy, Tapping Distributed Energy
Re-sources, Public Utilities Fortnightly, pp. 46-51, September 2004
[119] J. Dixon, L. Morán, J. Rodríguez, and R. Domke, Reactive Power Compensation Technolo-
gies, State-of-the-Art Review, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 93, No. 12, December 2005
[120]GRTN - Gestore della Rete di Trasmissione Nazionale, Power plant voltage and
reactive power regulator, October 2003, in Italian, online at: www.terna.it
[121]C. Brasca, R. Chinnici, M. Pozzi, and M. Zaramella, Practical implementation

aspects of a multilevel control solution for voltages and reactive regulation in
electrical power systems, in Proceedings of Process Control and Instrumentation
Conference, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, 2000

Università Degli Studi Di Pavia

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Università Degli Studi Di Pavia

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Università degli Studi di Pavia

Dottorato di Ricerca in Ingegneria

The need to coordinate generation and

Tesi di Dottorato di:

Ing. Ilaria Siviero

Chiar.mo Prof. Paolo Marannino

2.1 Power system planning and electricity market e-ciency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.5 Changes in the original Matlab-coded procedure

3.1 Ancillary services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

3.4.2 Literature on reactive power pricing and management . . . . . . . . . . . .106

A CIGRE-63 bus test system 166

B Power Distribution Factors 169

B.1 Basic distribution factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

C Slack bus modeling in load ow solutions 174

D Devices for reactive power support 179

E Italian hierarchical voltage control 188

2.1 Graph illustrating consumer and producer surpluses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3.1 Example of a synchronous generator loading capability diagram . . . . . . . . . . .

A.1 CIGRE 63-bus test system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

C.1 Flow-chart of a single slack bus load ow ...

D.1 An example of synchronous generator output capability curve [117] . . . . . . . . .

2.1 Contingency list (CIGRE 63-bus system) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

3.1 Payments by Italian consumers for excess withdrawal of reactive energy . . . . . .

3.7 Diagonal-dominance of the matrix @Q@QP;k . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

3.9 Pilot node voltages and reactive power productions - Case 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A.1 Generator buses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

D.1 Characteristics of voltage-control equipment [43]

1.1 Research motivations

Successful liberalization generally requires: sector restructuring, implementation of

1.1.1 Generation and transmission planning

1.1.2 Reactive support and voltage control

respond by installing dedicated voltage control equipment and by requiring generation

1.2 Research objectives

1.3 Thesis outline

WTLR and power system planning

2.1 Power system planning and electricity market e-ciency

Figure 2.1: Graph illustrating consumer and producer surpluses

Figure 2.3: Productive ine-ciency + Allocative e-ciency

Figure 2.4: Productive ine-ciency + Allocative ine-ciency

2.1.2 Generation system investments and Social Welfare

Capacity expansion investments enable a rm to expand the amount of its production

Figure 2.5: Eects of a capacity expansion investment

Figure 2.6: Eects of a cost reducing investment

Cost reducing investments consist in adopting new equipments to modernize the

Figure 2.7: Technological investments and market e-ciency

2.1.3 Transmission system expansion and Social Welfare

In competitive electricity markets, an increase in transmission capacity can have two

2.1.4 General considerations

2.2 Power system planning and network security

2.2.1 Measuring system security

 the higher the PACO, the weaker the branch.

aggregate contingency overload can be calculated as:

2.2.2 Generation expansion and power system security

2.2.2.1 Overload mitigation strategy

Figure 2.8: Overload mitigation strategy using generation

W T LRi = OverloadSY S ISDFjk PCO;jk + ISDFjk (st)PCO;jk

 P ,P st jk in intact system conditions and following the

The WTLR represents the locational impact of generation on network security: it

OverloadSY S) that would be obtained with a 1 MW injection at that particular bus.

2.2.3 Transmission planning and power system security

2.2.3.1 WTLR and transmission planning

The Weighted Transmission Loading Relief sensitivity is based on the overload

Figure 2.9: Transmission relief

the higher the PACO, the weaker the branch.

P ,P st jk in intact system conditions and following the

from bus ! negative-WTLR bus;

to bus ! positive-WTLR bus.

The set of nodes selected to dene the grid reinforcements includes:

Generation cost (according to the hourly cost function of generator i):

all the matrices 2 RNout Nb