discussions held on 28 - karnataka€¦ · it was noted that nldc had already advised blocking of...

17

Upload: others

Post on 03-Apr-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 2: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at

1

Discussions held on 28th May 2014 on the observations of KSEB on different SPS Schemes implemented post synchronization in WR & SR.

SPS 1 & 3:

It was explained that proposed load relief from the states could not be solely

based on their demand. Usage of ISTS network was also a very important

parameter. Though demand met could be lower, relative usage of ISTS network

in meeting this demand was also to be borne in mind. Another aspect in viewing

the same would be the ISGS allocation /allocation from Talcher-II station of NTPC

and total import ratios of SR beneficiaries.

It was therefore agreed that the existing scheme of load relief be retained. The

matter would be reexamined after commissioning of second circuit of 765 kV

Raichur-Sholapur link and experience post commissioning of the same.

To minimize repeated inconvenience to the same set of consumer on account of

SPS operation, it was suggested that states could come out with suitable schemes

for round robin/rotational load shedding. This would help ensure equitable

sharing of effects of SPS operation.

SRLDC observed that efficacy of the rotational load shedding needed to be

studied in real time operation. Hence, parallel operation for a couple of instances

so as to ascertain actual relief and validation would need to be done before any

migration to the new scheme. Further, there should not be any time delay in

obtaining the load relief. KPTCL informed that the maximum time limit to obtain

the relief would be less than 1000 milli second.

Page 3: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at

2

It was noted that the number of SPS operations in Southern Region had reduced

of late.

SPS 2:

It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme.

SPS 3:

The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at Hyderabad on 18th

January 2014. In that Meeting, the need for SPS operation in Southern Region to

meet eventuality of loss of import due to tripping of 765 kV line had already been

discussed and agreed.

POWERGRID was requested to expedite commissioning of this proposed SPS in

the interest of system security.

SPS 4

It was observed that SR Grid was presently connected with WR Grid through

single 765 kv line. Hence, all loads in SR were equally sensitive to the flow on 765

kV Raichur-Sholapur line. As regards load aspect, the same has already been

covered under SPS 1 & 3.

SPS 5 & 6

It was agreed that the matter regarding appropriate load shedding in

Maharashtra system would be taken up with NLDC and WRPC for necessary

compliance.

Page 4: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at

3

SPS 7

After discussions, it was felt that for flow exceeding 1,500 MW from SR to NEW

Grid, need for 765 kV line tripping may need examination. It was felt that NLDC

could be requested to carry out necessary studies to further examine this

suggestion.Ability of SR Grid to absorb the jerk of sudden loss of export of power

greater than 1,500MW could also be referred to NLDC.

SPS 8 & 9

It was explained by SRLDC that choice of loads had already been made

appropriately. The loads had been identified on the downstreamportion of the

lines so as to give proper relief.

KPTCL and APTRANSCO confirmed the above.

SPS 10

It was clarified by SRLDC that signal 3 had been devised on account of the

extended mode of operation of HVDC.(2500 MW for 10 hrs a day)Earlier, there

was uncovered load of about 500 MW not covered in any load relief scheme. This

was expected to be absorbed by the SR Grid since there was no interconnected

AC link with NEW Grid. However, after commissioning of 765 kV line, any pole

outage would result in increased power flow on the AC inter connection. Hence,

the two conditions had been concatenated. In case the same was not done,

there could be operation of other SPS schemes on account of higher flow through

Raichur-Sholapur line and upstream line.

SPS 11

It was noted that separate loads for Kudankulam SPS had already been identified.

Page 5: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at

4

Other

Constituents desired that a comprehensive list of SPS Schemes along with the

operating logics be made available to them, since number of modifications had

been proposed/ implemented.

***********

Page 6: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 7: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 8: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 9: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 10: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 11: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 12: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 13: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 14: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 15: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 16: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at
Page 17: Discussions held on 28 - Karnataka€¦ · It was noted that NLDC had already advised blocking of this scheme. SPS 3: The matter had been discussed in the Special Meeting held at