首页> 外文会议>IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference >Least-Cost Firm PV Power Generation: Dynamic Curtailment vs. Inverter-Limited Curtailment:
【24h】

Least-Cost Firm PV Power Generation: Dynamic Curtailment vs. Inverter-Limited Curtailment:

机译:最不成本的公司光伏发电:动态缩减与逆变器 - 有限的缩减:

获取原文

摘要

Overbuilding and dynamic curtailment are increasingly acknowledged as central to cost-optimally transforming intermittent PV and wind resources into firm power resources. While this strategy is not currently monetizable, firm power generation will be a prerequisite at ultra-high renewable penetration when demand will have to be met 24/365 without reliance on underlying dispatchable generation.A distinct overbuilding/curtailment strategy is increasingly implemented today: inverter-limited curtailment. This strategy can take advantage of some existing remuneration systems.In this article, we compare the effectiveness of the two strategies to deliver firm power generation at least cost. We consider the extreme case of PV meeting demand with 100% certainty using two MISO’s load balancing areas (#4 and #10) as experimental support. We show that, while both strategies can achieve firm power generation at a lower cost than curtailment avoidance would, dynamic curtailment is far more cost-effective than inverter-limited curtailment. Importantly, we also show that optimally combining both strategies can further reduce firm power generation cost.
机译:过度建设和动态缩减越来越被视为成本最佳地将间歇性PV和风力资源转换为坚固的电力资源的核心。虽然这种策略目前没有可可批准的,但在不依赖潜在的调度一代的情况下,需求必须满足需求的情况下,坚固的发电将是超高可再生渗透的先决条件。今天越来越多地实施了不同的过度建设/缩减策略:逆变器 - 限制缩减。该策略可以利用一些现有的薪酬系统。在本文中,我们比较了两种策略的有效性,以至少成本提供牢固发电。我们认为PV会议需求的极端情况,使用两个MISO负载平衡区域(#4和#10)作为实验支持,以100%确定的需求。我们展示了这一点,虽然两种策略都可以以低于缩减避免的成本实现牢固的发电,而动态缩减比逆变器限制削减更具成本效益。重要的是,我们还表明,最佳地组合两个策略可以进一步降低企业发电成本。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号