The Denmark Challenge - Lessons From an Emerging Wind Power - The people of Denmark have a story to tell in their own Nordic unassuming way. You hear it from quietly proud Per Volund, an engineer, as he takes a group of Americans out on a small boat to tour the Middlegrunden wind farm in Copenhagen harbor.
By reading carefully the story, two further lessons can be extracted by applying the EWPC market architecture and design paradigm to the article:
Lesson #1: Transmission (and distribution) investment should be done at least costs.
Under the EWPC article Financing and Developing Wind Projects, I wrote “Optimal transportation should be the result of expansion planning where all potential wind projects (see also Wind Integration: An Emerging Paradigm) are taken into consideration at the same time for a give planning horizon. Such expansion planning is to be done in the environment suggested in the article Free Market and Central Planning, Under R1E2.”
This is what Martin Rosenberg wrote relative to the lesson:
"Denmark has invested heavily in its power grid, viewing its as a necessary resource, according to Lise Nielson, program coordinator for Energinet, which develops and owns Denmark's electricity and natural gas transmission lines. "Utilities and grids in Denmark have always worked on a nonprofit basis," she said. The grid operators are dedicated to spurring development of all viable generation resources. "We will build grid out to any generation." Furthermore, Energinet has long sought the highest levels of reliability, building its power grid in a robust circular design similar to fiber-optic telecommunications networks in the United States. Costly, perhaps, "but what is the cost of a blackout?" Nielson asked."
"As for those Americans who say the design of the current power grid is an impediment to widespread wind generation, Danes say America must make needed investments in the grid to make it more reliable."
According to Joseph T. Kelliher, chairman of the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, “Today, there are more than 500 transmission owners…,” which is interpreted by Martin as a “balkanized grid.”
"Peter Wenzel Kruse, Vestas vice president, forthrightly declared, "The U.S. grid is worn down. You're just walking a thin line of collapsing the economy." Investing in the grid would allow wind generation to go forward. "There is tons of cheap wind power in the Midwest," he said."
Lesson #2: Distribution needs to be integrated with transmission.
Under the EWPC article Innovation and Risk Taking in the Power Industry, I wrote: “When demand is inactive, distribution is also inactive, and the interface between transmission and distribution can be assumed to be simple and dependent. When demand is active, in time and space, distribution is very active, and the interface between transmission and distribution becomes highly interdependent and complex, under power system planning, operation and control. Transmission and distribution integration is a must to reap the value creation of the smart grid transportation (T&D) utility.”
In relation to this lesson, Marty wrote:
While the Danes feel they have a superior grid – the power network's nervous system – they are intent on developing its intelligence as well. Power systems have for ages relied on a handful of large central generating stations. With the advent of wind and other renewable energy forms, more small sites will go on and off line depending on a variety of factors. These resources must be integrated and used in the most efficient ways. To meet these complex requirements, Danish scientists have launched Syslab, a research facility for distributed power systems in Roskilde, located on a fjord west of Copenhagen. The development of a futuristic intelligent power system is a daunting task, said Henrik Bindner, at the Riso National Laboratory, where Syslab is located. "The challenge is to have millions of inputs," he said. "It's up in the air how to control such a system."
Ed Bair
Ed Bair
Thanks for your posts.
Before I complete my answer, Did you fully understand the meaning of "3) Wind generation variability is an important consideration, but wind generation uncertainty is even more important. Power system systemic risk management of system failure (system security) responds to uncertainty. Supply side management of systemic risk of system failure should be complemented by demand side management of systemic risk of system failure" in the article "Wind Integration: An Emerging Paradigm."?
Ed Bair
Sam Insull's idea of the two part rate is obsolete is the basis for your comment on peak demand. It was design to encourage people use more electricity. Insull and his descendents IOUs would no do business without the demand charge. The widely held belief on the myth that electric generation is a monopoly ended in 1978 and was later revived with The BIG California LIE please hit the link http://www.energyblogs.com/ewpc/index.cfm/2007/9/1... . As EWPC emerged, the myth has ended.
Fred C. Schweppe et al, in their book "Spot Pricing of Electricity," state very clearly that "demand charge do not send good price signals," and "demand charges are not a good way to recover capital costs." In fact, they say "Since the price signal sent by a demand charge bears little relationship to hourly spot prices . . . customers are not motivated to adjust their usage patterns to match the utility's capabilities." This motivation is the key in demand side system security.
Another problem that I infer from your statements is that generation is owned by financial capital. Since EWPC results in a stable market environment, generation and retail should be owned by production capital.
I hope that you can see the importance of the two lessons (to be) learned that I wrote. The second lesson is that system security is not just about transmission, but transmission integrated with distribution, which I term transportation. The first lesson is that Americans should expand the transportation system at least costs, instead of the crazy rush now in place to invest heavily without much coordination.
By the way, Denmark has now a 20 per cent penetration of wind generation and is planning to go to 50 percent. They are using the Nordic electricity market rules to store wind generation with hydro generation. Just like America, I believe the Nordic market needs a lot of leadership as you can see in the EWPC article Handling Sweden's Electric Reform Threats in the link http://www.energyblogs.com/ewpc/index.cfm/2007/10/...
Ed Bair
2/8/08
The information on Denmark's Wind Story (the original energybiz article) was in the first link of my article.
I bet that the most important belief is between the system and the parts. Unreliable parts can be put together to make a reliable system. That is what system security is all about. That is neither physics, nor regulation.
But EWPC re-regulation is key to have a controlled market that enforces system security with a proper mix of supply side and demand side that comes from an open retail and wholesale market. By developing the resources of the demand side a lot of energy storage (a lot of physics!) will be at the dispossal of power system planning, operation and control. The third lesson is, thanks God, that uncertain generation (wind, solar, etc.) is here to stay!
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/elecprih...
electricity purchases.
Check the link http://www.eepublishers.co.za/view.php?sid=5096
I found out more up to date prices on the Internationa Energy Agency 2007 report. They have as the latest figures (obviously not 2007) 0.0759 US/kWh for industry and 0.3237 for households. So the figures might mean that households should invest in renewables, to give industry a big subsidy. That is why I suggest the EWPC article "Shrinking the Regulator's Jobs" in the link http://www.energyblogs.com/ewpc/index.cfm/2008/2/2...
That is also why I suggest the EWPC article "The World Shouldn't be Running Out of Electricity " in the link http://www.energyblogs.com/ewpc/index.cfm/2008/2/2...
Professor Banks also commented that he prefers to look at costs rather than prices. This is where we differ. Price subsumes both the supply side as well as the demand side, giving us a broader picture than cost alone can give.
Now, when I said that I prefer costs on the demand side, it is because customers have also outages costs and transaction costs that need to be taken into account. Electricty costs are then the sum of energy costs plus outage costs plus transaction costs.
Under EWPC one of the early differentiators of 2GRs is precisely customers' outage costs, which give an even broader picture than prices. On the Third Industrial Revolution that we are already experiencing, retail transaction costs are getting lower and lower as time goes by, enabling true customers' choice.