impact of growing renewable energy generation onto thermal ...€¦ · “impact of growing...

“Impact of growing renewable energy generation onto thermal power plant operation

in Germany”

July 7th – 9th ECM3, Aberdeen

08/12/16 © 2009 UNIVERSITÄT ROSTOCK 1

Dipl.-Ing. Christian ZiemsProf. Dr. Harald Weber

Dr.-Ing. Sebastian Meinke (Vattenfall R&D)Dr.-Ing. Ibrahim Nassar

Dipl.-Ing. Matthias Huber (TU Munich)

Institute of Electrical Power Engineering & Department of Technical ThermodynamicsUniversity of Rostock

Motivation: Substitute the limited fossil fuels with unlimited renewable energy sources

Massive reduction of the CO2 emissions

Stop the production of nuclear waste

Eliminate the threat of nuclear accidents like Fukushima 2011

Motivation, Goals and ChallengesTransition to renewable energy sources

Eliminate the threat of nuclear accidents like Fukushima 2011

Goals: Reduce the CO2 emissions up to 80% until 2050 in Germany

Nuclear phase-out planned until the end of 2022

Increase the total fraction of all renewables sources up to 45% of the electrical energy demand until 2025 and up to 80% until 2050

Challenges: Use as much renewable power as possible directly when it is produced


Challenges: Use as much renewable power as possible directly when it is produced

To achieve the highest efficiency of the potentials

Due to the high losses of storage systems store only as much as necessary

Problem of power transmission because of limitations of the transmission lines etc.

Problem of balancing power of intermittent sources by thermal power plants

Guarantee the safety of supply

controlled power productionof fossil and (nuclear) power plants

with limited fuels, nuclear waste & high CO2 emissions

fuel: lignite, hard coal, natural gas, Uranium

Motivation, Goals and ChallengesTransition to renewable energy sources

uncontrolled power production

of wind and photovoltaic systems

with intermittent feed-in (not reliable)

Wind turbinesfuel: lignite, hard coal, natural gas, Uranium Wind turbines

Photovoltaic systems

Situation 2014:

34 GW

expected 2020:

50+ GW

Situation 2014:

Power plant

operation depends

on intermittent

feedin

Integration of

intermittent


Goal: - massive reduction of CO2 emissions

- nuclear phase-out until 2022

Situation 2014:

36 GW

expected 2020:

50+ GW

intermittent

feedin depends

on flexibility of

conv. Power

plants

Expected installed capacity until 2020:

>100 GW (>33% of annual electricity demand)

Expected growth of installed capacities ofGerman wind turbines & photovoltaic systems

50,0 GW

60,0 GW

70,0 GW

Wind onshore Wind offshore

50,0 GW

60,0 GW

70,0 GW

Installed capacity PV

Installed 2020:

Wind PV

Peak load in Germany: app. 80 GW (expected to remain constant)

Expected installed power until 2025

0,0 GW

10,0 GW

20,0 GW

30,0 GW

40,0 GW

50,0 GW

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

200,0 TWh

Wind onshore Wind offshore

0,0 GW

10,0 GW

20,0 GW

30,0 GW

40,0 GW

50,0 GW

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

PV Einspeisung

70,0 TWh

Wind PV

51,0 GW + 51,7 GW

Σ 102,7 GW

Expected energy to be “harvested” until 2025Consumption in Germany 2011: app. 600 TWh (expected to remain constant)


0,0 TWh

20,0 TWh

40,0 TWh

60,0 TWh

80,0 TWh

100,0 TWh

120,0 TWh

140,0 TWh

160,0 TWh

180,0 TWh

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

0,0 TWh

10,0 TWh

20,0 TWh

30,0 TWh

40,0 TWh

50,0 TWh

60,0 TWh

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Annual harvest

2020:

Wind PV

138,8 TWh + 54,2 TWh

Σ 193 TWh

Capacities of renewable energy from windand solar systems expected until 2025 in Germany

120,0 GW

140,0 GW

Wind onshore Wind offshore PV Max. load

40,0 GW

60,0 GW

80,0 GW

100,0 GW

120,0 GW


0,0 GW

20,0 GW

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Combinations of different load andintermittent feed-in (non-dispatchable feed-in)

In the Future (2020)In the past (2008)

Winter period in January

70.000

80.000

90.000

100.000

70.000

80.000

90.000

100.000

70.000

80.000

90.000

100.000

Lei

stu

ng

in M

W

Summer period in May/June

0

10.000

20.000

30.000

40.000

50.000

60.000

Leis

tun

g in

MW

0

10.000

20.000

30.000

40.000

50.000

60.000

70.000

Lei

stu

ng

in M

W

70.000

80.000

90.000

100.000

Lei

stu

ng

in M

W

Residual load provided by dispatchable plants


0

10.000

20.000

30.000

40.000

50.000

60.000

Lei

stu

ng

in M

W

0

10.000

20.000

30.000

40.000

50.000

60.000

Lei

stu

ng

in M

WResidual load provided by dispatchable plants

Hydro (run-of-river) Combined-Heat&Power (CHP) Photovoltaic (PV) Offshore Wind

Onshore Wind Residual Load Total demand (load)

Wind and PV

Transition of the power systeminto a renewable system

A simplified scheme of the powerbalance of the generation system

Non-dispatchable feed-in

ThermalPower Plants &

Pumped Storage

One nodenetwork model

Residual load++

-

Wind and PV

(CHP & Hydro)

+

Pdispatchable Presidual load

Pnon-dispatchable

Pload

Dispatchable generation


Pumped Storage

Always Zero,Frequency „∆f“ is indicator of power balance

Consumers

Actually noDemand Side Management

40

60

80

Resulting annual residual load curve

Residual load curve isshifted

-40

-20

0

20

40

Po

we

r [G

W]

Po

we

r d

em

an

d i

n G

W

Requirements forbackup power>50 GW will remain

2011

2020

2030

20502040


-80

-60

-40

0 730 1.460 2.190 2.920 3.650 4.380 5.110 5.840 6.570 7.300 8.030

Hours

Increasing generationsurplus has to be

exported or stored

Merit Order Method (example prices)

Current power demand

One hour oriented

Day-Ahead-Scheduling

Sou

rce:

DI D

r. G

erol

d P

etrit

sch,

Uni

vers

ity o

f Vie

nna,

Fac

ulty

of M

athe

mat

ics

Oil and

gas turbines

Sou

rce:

DI D

r. G

erol

d P

etrit

sch,

Uni

vers

ity o

f Vie

nna,

Fac

ulty

of M

athe

mat

ics

Run-of-river and

storage water

LigniteHard coal

Pumped storage power

Hard coal

Gas

Pro

du

ctio

n c

ost

s in

Eu

ro/M

Wh

Nuclear energy


Optimization goal:Meet the demand at any time with minized production costs

00:0001:00

02:00…

Sou

rce:

DI D

r. G

erol

d P

etrit

sch,

Uni

vers

ity o

f Vie

nna,

Fac

ulty

of M

athe

mat

ics

Cumulated installed electrical power in GW

Flexibility assumptions for scenariosof different thermal types (refers to the rated power)

10,0% 10,0% 10,0%

2,5%5,0% 5,0% 5,0% 2,5%100%

+∆P primary control

55,0%60,0% 60,0%

5,0%

5,0%

5,0% 2,5%

10,0%

10,0%

10,0%

2,5%+/- 50,0%

40%

60%

80%

op

era

tio

n p

oin

t


+∆P secondary

control

∆P schedule

-∆P secondary

control

-∆P primary control


55,0%50,0%

30,0%

0%

20%

Lignite Hard coal CCPP Nuclear Gasturbines

minimum load if

control enabled

Nuclear

17,1%

Industrial

incl. CHP

8,0%

Nuclear

0,0%

Lignite

20,1%

Industrial

incl. CHP

7,5%

Resulting generation structure in GermanyPercentage basis referred to net electr. generation

17,1%

Lignite

24,3%

Hard coal

PV

4,1%

Wind

10,8%

Hydro

4,1%

CHP general

10,0%

20,1%

Hard coal

16,6%

Wind

26,1%

Hydro

3,9%

CHP general

14,5%

Renewablesw/o biomass:

19 %

Renewables


Hard coal

18,2%natural gas

w/o CHP

3,4%

4,1%

2011Net electr. generation: 587,4 TWh

--> thereof surplus: 0 TWh

--> thereof export: 18,3 TWh

natural gas

w/o CHP

1,7%PV

9,6%

2023Net electr. generation: 625,1 TWh

--> thereof surplus: 4,5 TWh

--> thereof export: 50,5 TWh

Renewablesw/o biomass:

40 %

70.000,0

80.000,0

90.000,0 P_PV

P_Wind_onshore

P_Wind_offshore

P_KWK

Winter 2010 2015 2020 2025

Displacement of conventional power Exemplary power plant scheduling for one week

P_Gesamtlast

Residual_load

Consumption Germany

Residual load

90

80

70

0,0

10.000,0

20.000,0

30.000,0

40.000,0

50.000,0

60.000,0

70.000,0

Lei

stu

ng

in M

W

P_KWK

P_Wasser

import

PSW_turb

GuD

SKW

BKW

KKW

surplus

PSW_pump

P_PV

P_Wind_onshore

P_Wind_offshore

P_KWK

P_Wasser

PSW_turb

GuD

SKW

BKW

KKW

Photovoltaic (PV)

Onshore Wind

Offshore Wind

Combined Heat & Power (CHP)

Run-of-river

Pumped Storage Turbine Mode

Combined Cycle Power Plant (CCPP)

Hard coal

Lignite

Nuclear

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Po

we

r in

GW


-20.000,0

-10.000,0

0,01 2 3 4 5 6 7

Ausgewählte Tage

PSW_pump

export

P_Gesamtlast

Residual_load

KKW

surplus

PSW_pump

Nuclear

Surplus

Pumped Storage Pump Mode

0

-10

-20Days

70.000,0

80.000,0

90.000,0 P_PV

P_Wind_onshore

P_Wind_offshore

P_KWK

Winter 2010 2015 2020 202590

80

70

P_Gesamtlast

Residual_load


Consumption Germany

Residual load

0,0

10.000,0

20.000,0

30.000,0

40.000,0

50.000,0

60.000,0

70.000,0

Lei

stu

ng

in M

W

P_KWK

P_Wasser

import

PSW_turb

GuD

SKW

BKW

KKW

surplus

PSW_pump

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Po

we

r in

GW

P_PV

P_Wind_onshore

P_Wind_offshore

P_KWK

P_Wasser

PSW_turb

GuD

SKW

BKW

KKW

Photovoltaic (PV)

Onshore Wind

Offshore Wind


Run-of-river



Hard coal

Lignite

Nuclear


-20.000,0

-10.000,0

0,01 2 3 4 5 6 7

Ausgewählte Tage

PSW_pump

export

P_Gesamtlast

Residual_load

0

-10

-20

KKW

surplus

PSW_pump

Nuclear

Surplus


Days

70.000,0

80.000,0

90.000,0 P_PV

P_Wind_onshore

P_Wind_offshore

Summer 2010 2015 2020 2025


P_Gesamtlast

Residual_load

Consumption Germany

Residual load

90

80

70

0,0

10.000,0

20.000,0

30.000,0

40.000,0

50.000,0

60.000,0

70.000,0

Lei

stu

ng

in M

W

P_KWK

P_Wasser

import

PSW_turb

GuD

SKW

BKW

KKW

surplus

PSW_pump

P_PV

P_Wind_onshore

P_Wind_offshore

P_KWK

P_Wasser

PSW_turb

GuD

SKW

BKW

KKW

Photovoltaic (PV)

Onshore Wind

Offshore Wind


Run-of-river



Hard coal

Lignite

Nuclear

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Po

we

r in

GW


-20.000,0

-10.000,0

0,01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Ausgewählte Tage

PSW_pump

export

P_Gesamtlast

Residual_load

KKW

surplus

PSW_pump

Nuclear

Surplus


0

-10

-20Days

70.000,0

80.000,0

90.000,0 P_PV

P_Wind_onshore

P_Wind_offshore

Summer 2010 2015 2020 202590

80

70

P_Gesamtlast

Residual_load


Consumption Germany

Residual load

0,0

10.000,0

20.000,0

30.000,0

40.000,0

50.000,0

60.000,0

70.000,0

Lei

stu

ng

in M

W

P_KWK

P_Wasser

import

PSW_turb

GuD

SKW

BKW

KKW

surplus

PSW_pump

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Po

we

r in

GW

P_PV

P_Wind_onshore

P_Wind_offshore

P_KWK

P_Wasser

PSW_turb

GuD

SKW

BKW

KKW

Photovoltaic (PV)

Onshore Wind

Offshore Wind


Run-of-river



Hard coal

Lignite

Nuclear


-20.000,0

-10.000,0

0,01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Ausgewählte Tage

PSW_pump

export

P_Gesamtlast

Residual_load

0

-10

-20

KKW

surplus

PSW_pump

Nuclear

Surplus


Days

Increasing

capacity of wind and solar generators:

Change of single thermal power plant

operation and utilizationProject 333


Load gradient Scenarios

2.5%, 4%, 6%

Lastgradient

Limits of a thermal power plantVariation of different flexibility parameters

Simulate different operation modes

operation parameters

Pmin

Gradmax

2.5%, 4%, 6%

Mindestlast

Min load scenarios

50%, 37.5%, 33%, 20 %


Simulation of critical load and intermittent

scenarios under variation of load gradient, min

load of PP Rostock or operation of the power

plant in unconventional partial load

special operation modes

„shut down & restart“

„reduce to circulation mode“

Stillstand

10,0%

20,0% 20,0%

5,0% 5,0% 5,0%

80%

100%


+∆P secondary control

Compared Flexibility Options (TPP Rostock)Pmax=500MW net, eta=43.2%, hard coal, comm. In 1994

35,0% 35,0%

25,0%

5,0%

5,0%

5,0%

10,0%

20,0%

20,0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

Op

erat

ion

po

int

∆P schedule

-∆P secondary control

-∆P primary control

unconventional

sector

technical

minimum load


0%

Flex today

Ramping: 2%/min

FlexOption 1

4%/min

FlexOption 2

4%/min

Unconventional sector: If primary and secondary control is used this operation point normally is not useddue to coal mill switching

Potential for optimization to achieve higher flexibility

Optimization in existing plant

For new plants

40,0

60,0

80,0

20

30

40

50

60

70

spe

cifi

c s

tart

s e

ach

10

00

fu

ll l

oa

d h

nu

mb

er

of

sta

rt-u

ps

Annual start-up cycles

Results for „Flex today“Without enhanced flexibility

10,0%

10,0%

5,0%

60%

80%

100%

Op

erat

ion

po

int

Flexibility in this case

2011 2020 2023

Flex

today

Flex

today

Flex

today

cold start 0 35 29

warm start 11 27 31

hot start 3 2 6

specific 1,9 19,3 16,6

0,0

20,0

0

10

20

spe

cifi

c s

tart

s e

ach

10

00

fu

ll l

oa

d h

nu

mb

er

of

sta

rt

Annual full load and operating hours

35,0%

5,0%

10,0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

Flex today

Ramping: 2%/min

Op

erat

ion

po

int

8.000

600

2011 Flex today 2020 Flex today 2023 Flex today

Annual partial load operation


2011 2020 2023

Flex

today

Flex

today

Flex

today

full load hours 7399 3321 3977

operating hours 7629 3774 4423

0

2.000

4.000

6.000h

ou

rs

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 731 1461 2191 2921 3651 4381 5111 5841 6571 7301 8031

po

we

r in

MW

annual operating hours


Results for „Flex Option 1“With enhancements in the existing plant


20,0%

5,0%

60%

80%

100%

Op

erat

ion

po

int

40,0

60,0

80,0

20

30

40

50

60

70

spe

cifi

c s

tart

s e

ach

10

00

fu

ll l

oa

d h

nu

mb

er

of

sta

rt-u

ps


35,0%

5,0%

20,0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

FlexOption 1

4%/min

Op

erat

ion

po

int

2011 2020 2023

Flex

today

Flex

Option 1

Flex

Option 1

cold start 0 17 8

warm start 11 22 17

hot start 3 5 6

specific 1,9 13,2 7,7

0,0

20,0

0

10

20

spe

cifi

c s

tart

s e

ach

10

00

fu

ll l

oa

d h

nu

mb

er

of

sta

rt

8.000

600

2011 Flex today 2020 FlexOption 1 2023 FlexOption 1



2011 2020 2023

Flex

today

Flex

Option 1

Flex

Option 1

full load hours 7399 3330 4024

operating hours 7629 5828 6860

0

2.000

4.000

6.000h

ou

rs

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 731 1461 2191 2921 3651 4381 5111 5841 6571 7301 8031

po

we

r in

MW



Results for „Flex Option 2“With enhanced design parameters for new plants


20,0%

5,0%

60%

80%

100%

Op

erat

ion

po

int

40,0

60,0

80,0

20

30

40

50

60

70

spe

cifi

c s

tart

s e

ach

10

00

fu

ll l

oa

d h

nu

mb

er

of

sta

rt-u

ps


25,0%

5,0%

20,0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

FlexOption 2

4%/min

Op

erat

ion

po

int

2011 2023

Flex

today

Flex

Option 2

cold start 0 0

warm start 11 5

hot start 3 1

specific 1,9 1,6

0,0

20,0

0

10

20

spe

cifi

c s

tart

s e

ach

10

00

fu

ll l

oa

d h

nu

mb

er

of

sta

rt

8.000

600

2011 Flex today 2023 FlexOption 2



2011 2023

Flex

today

Flex

Option 2

full load hours 7399 3646

operating hours 7629 7738

0

2.000

4.000

6.000h

ou

rs

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 731 1461 2191 2921 3651 4381 5111 5841 6571 7301 8031

po

we

r in

MW


Investigation of power plant schedulesHourly resolution (example Thermal Plant Rostock)

450

500

Minimum load Neg. primary res Neg. secondary res

Pos. secondary res Pos. primary res Scheduled setpoint

150

200

250

300

350

400

ele

ctric

al p

ow

er o

utp

ut i

n M

W


0

50

100

150

ele

ctric

al p

ow

er o

utp

ut i

n M

W

time

Results for annual ordered utilizationlignite fired power plant 2015/2025 –No information for load step frequency evaluation in this figure type


Results for annual utilizationAnnually ordered load change steps (weeks over the year)


Results for annual pos. ReservesAnnually ordered reserved power (weeks over the year)

Tertiary

Secondary

Primary


Primary

Detection of Restrictions

Degradation of the regulating

capabilities due to low mass flow rates

overview

50% 4% Pressure deviations in the furnace due capabilities due to low mass flow rates

Shut down of coal mills

Low exhaust temperature prior DENOX

Switch over to circulation mode

Life steam temperature decreases

which cause thermal stress cycles

50%

34%

Pressure deviations in the furnace due

to low regulation capabilities of the

forced draft fan

Regulating capabilites of the coal mills is

restrictive


which cause thermal stress cycles

Low primary air temperatures in coal

mills

Single feed water pump operation

lowering minimum load

20%

enhancedload gradient

2%

Increasing fatigue due to temperature

deviations

Possible Optimizations

Modified control parameters for low

Identification & quantification

50% 4%

potential by expanding the data basis, Modified control parameters for low

partial load

Analysis of the potential of map based

coal mill control and coal dust mass

flow rate

Optimization of the switch events (1/2

Pump operation, on/off switching of

coal mills and change from circulation

to Benson operation)

50%

34%

potential by expanding the data basis,

e.g. map based determination of

heating value, measurement of coal

dust mass flow

Optimization of the control parameters,

e.g. dynamic of the ratio fuel rate to

feed water mass flow


Investigation of the circulation mode as

an alternative operation to shut down

and restart

20% 2%

lowering minimum load

enhancedload gradient

Overview of dynamic power plant model

Scope of Power Plant Model

• Water steam cycle from feed watertank until

condenser, including start up devices

• Air Duct from forced draft fan until air preheater• Air Duct from forced draft fan until air preheater

exhaust gas outlet

• reproduction of the independent coal mills and of

combustion with regard to the coal composition

• reduced copy of the Control system including control

for fuel mass flow rate, feed water pump, spray

attemporators, coal mills, circulation cycle, turbine

bypass and forced draft and mill fan

• Can be operated with arbitrary load schedule

Modeling of:

exhaust gas

coal

steam air

preheater

air

preheater

coal mills

economizer

reheater 1

superheater 3

reheater 2

superheater 4

superheater 2

superheater 1

HP IP LPHPB

IPBevaporator

circula-

tion

cyclone

start bottle

to condensor

to LPP

air

preheater


Structure of the power plant model

• Temperature distribution in thick walled

components fatigue investigations

• Calculation of process parameters (e.g. DENOX-

inlet temperature, efficiency, etc.)

• Modular structure enables model extension or

substitution of components (e.g. simple

Implementation of new control concepts)

firingfresh

air

forced

draft fan

mill fan

feed water

pump

HPP

tion

pump

from

feed water

tank

Power plant Rostock

Demonstration scenario:12 h of load schedule operation

Pelek

Results of power plant simulation

Load schedule

Pelek

t

Net-power

t

Component fatigue


• Creation of an fictitious load schedule with load set points between 37 % und 100% load

• Model calculates the resulting generator output

• Benchmark of the operation mode – evaluation of component fatigue for the

corresponding basic operation , e.g. Start or schedule load change/step

Component fatigue

Presentation of the base scenario of the evaluation

Last

Sekundärregelsignal

Industrie

Gewerbe

Windeinspeisung Netto-Leistung Fahrplan

Netzregelmodell

Haushalte

Gewerbe

Windkraftanlagen

Kraftwerk Rostock


Kohle

Kernenergie

Gas

Windkraftanlagen

Structure of Base scenario

• coupling of the detailed model of power plant Rostock with simplified model of the

rest power plant fleet in the control area

• application of a load schedule (from power plant scheduling model)

• input of a critical load and wind scenario

• evaluation of secondary reserve demand from power difference in the control area

power plant Rostock

Derivation of compare scenario

Pelek

tPelek

Pmin

Gradmax

load schedule

t

secondary reserve signal

t

Pelek

net power

t


type of coal automation control types of operation

Pmin

• Variation der used coal

• Implementation of optimized automation control

• usage of different operation parameters

Influence of decreasing inertia:

A short introduction into

power system control Project 345


Control of Electrical Power Systems

Acceleration-power

of Inertiasof conventionalPower Plants

Primary-control

(Load-FrequencyControl

Secondary-control

Tertiary ControlMinute-

reserve and„Intra day“

Tertiary Control„Day ahead

Planing“

In rotating

machines

+/-3.000MW ENTSO-E

+/-610MW GER

In rotating

machines

+/- 2.230MW GER

(not) rotating

+ 1.800MW GER

- 2.500MW GER

Time constant

TN=2*H

N:

today TN=10s-15s


Time frame

Milliseconds Seconds 15 Minutes Hours

N

NN P

ΩJ=H

2

2

1 ⋅⋅

Development of the time constant TNin the Entso-e-system


ENTSO-E-System

Case 1: Winter 2011 (0% Wind and PV)TN = 10,6 s

CHPHPPCCPP

CCPP

tnuclear

Lignite

Hard coal

Primary control positive

nuclear

lignite

hard coal

CCPP

GT


SKWSKWHard coalGT

Primary control negative

nuclear

lignite

hard coal

CCPP

GT

Case 2: Winter 2011 (47% Wind and PV)TN = 5,7 s

Wind

Lignite

Hard coal

nuclear

Lignite coal

CHPHPP

Hard coal


nuclear

lignite

hard coal

CCPP

GT


Lignite GT


nuclear

lignite

hard coal

CCPP

GT

Case 3: Sommer 2023 (81% Wind and PV)TN = 2,1 s

Wind onshore

Solar

Lignite

Wind offshoreGPPs/CCGPPsCHP

HPPHard coal

Hard coal

CCPPs


nuclear

lignite

hard coal

CCPP

GT

GTPPs


Lignite

Hard coalGT


nuclear

lignite

hard coal

CCPP

GT

Simulated Frequency Cases 1 - 3


Measurements in the Irish NetworkSystem frequency begins to oscillate due to reduced inertia26 of December 2014 at 10:38 pm

Due to a changed strategy of power plant operation from partial load with several thermal power stations to only a few nearfull load, inertia was reduce to level that the systems startet to oscillate

• Fraction of Wind 37%• Only a few turbo-generators

left

• Unit C30 Trip at 22:38• MW; Hz • 7 Min Oscillation• Pk-Pk: ~0.3 – 0.4 Hz


• Pk-Pk: ~0.3 – 0.4 Hz• Period of Osc: 15 s (0.066

Hz)

Quelle: ESB, Electric Ireland

Thank you for your attention!Thank you for your attention!

Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering

Department of Technical Thermodynamics


Prof. Dr.-Ing. H. WeberProf. Dr.-Ing. habil. E. Hassel

Dipl.-Ing. C. Ziems

Dr.-Ing. J. Nocke

Dipl.-Ing. S. Meinke

Dr.-Ing. I. Nassar

impact of growing renewable energy generation onto thermal ...€¦ · “impact of growing...

Documents