Advertisement

Cubic reward penalty structure for power distribution companies

  • Sreenithya Sumesh
  • Vidyasagar Potdar
  • Aneesh KrishnaEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

An important significance of restructuring in power industry is the emergence of regulatory performance indices in the power distribution companies. Reward-penalty scheme is a direct control method that regulators use to assure the performance regulatory controls such as system reliability, service efficiency, and customer interruption cost. It is used as a financial tool designed to prevent the service reliability and efficiency deterioration of power distribution companies. Reward penalty scheme rewards the distribution company which provides good reliable power and penalizes those who act otherwise. In this paper, we propose a Cubic Reward-Penalty scheme, to improve the service reliability of power distribution companies. The novel feature of this scheme is the use of cubic reward/penalty formulation which varies in a cubic fashion based on the behavior of the performance-based reliability. In this paper, two methods of implementing Cubic Reward-Penalty scheme are explained: CRPS with no dead band and no reward/penalty capping and CRPS with dead band and reward/penalty capping. These proposed approaches are mainly intended for the regulators who are concerned about the customers affected by the outage duration. The significance of this research, lies in encouraging power distribution companies, to maintain, or even improve, customer service and satisfaction, by developing the Performance Regulatory Reward-Penalty schemes. This paper also provides most of the requirements and design rationale of Cubic Reward-Penalty Structure, its theoretical foundation and its prototype implementation.

Keywords

Deregulation Power Reliability Performance Reward Penalty 

Notes

References

  1. Adefarati T, Bansal RC (2017) Reliability assessment of distribution system with the integration of renewable distributed generation. Appl Energy 185(January):158–171.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.10.087 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajodhia V, Hakvoort R (2005) Economic regulation of quality in electricity distribution networks. Utilities Policy 13(3):211–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ajodhia V, Schiavo LL, Malaman R (2006) Quality regulation of electricity distribution in Italy: an evaluation study. Energy Policy 34(13):1478–1486.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2004.11.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Allan RN (2013) Reliability evaluation of power systems. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Alvehag K, Awodele K (2014) Impact of Reward and penalty scheme on the incentives for distribution system reliability. IEEE Trans Power Syst 29(1):386–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Alvehag K, Söder L (2010) Financial risk assessment for distribution system operators regulated by quality regulation. In: IEEE, pp 475–480Google Scholar
  7. Alvehag K, Söder L (2011) Risk-based method for distribution system reliability investment decisions under performance-based regulation. Gener Transm Distrib IET 5(10):1062–1072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Alvehag K, Söder L (2012) Quality regulation impact on investment decisions in distribution system reliability. In: 2012 9th international conference on the European Energy Market, pp 1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1109/EEM.2012.6254646
  9. Alvehag K, Söder L (2012) Comparison of cost models for estimating customer interruption costs. In: Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems (PMAPS), Istanbul, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  10. Bertling L, Allan R, Eriksson R (2005) A reliability-centered asset maintenance method for assessing the impact of maintenance in power distribution systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 20(1):75–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Biewald B, Synapse Energy Economics (1997) Performance-based regulation in a restructured electric industry. National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  12. Billinton R, Pan Z (2002) Incorporating Reliability Index probability distributions in performance based regulation. In: IEEE, vol 1, pp 12–17Google Scholar
  13. Billinton R, Pan Z (2004) Historic performance-based distribution system risk assessment. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 19(4):1759–1765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Billinton R, Wangdee W (2006) Utilizing bulk electric system reliability performance index probability distributions in a performance based regulation framework. In: IEEE, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  15. Billinton R, Salvaderi L, McCalley JD, Chao H, Th Seitz RN, Allan JO, Fallon C (1997) Reliability issues in today’s electric power utility environment. IEEE Trans Power Syst 12(4):1708–1714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Billinton R, Cui L, Pan Z (2002) Quantitative reliability considerations in the determination of performance-based rates and customer service disruption payments. In: IET, vol 149, pp 640–644Google Scholar
  17. Božič D, Pantoš M (2013) Assessment of investment efficiency in a power system under performance-based regulation. Energy 51:330–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Brown RE (2008) Electric power distribution reliability. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Brown RE (2009) Electric power distribution reliability. CRC press, Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, pp 40–114Google Scholar
  20. Brown RE, Burke JJ (2000) Managing the risk of performance based rates. IEEE Trans Power Syst 15(2):893–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chowdhury A, Koval D (2009) Standards for reregulated distribution utility. In: Power distribution system reliability: practical methods and applications. Wiley-IEEE Press, pp 317–335. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=5396774
  22. Council of European Energy Regulators (2015) CEER benchmarking Report 5.2 on the continuity of electricity supply. C14-EQS-62–03Google Scholar
  23. da Silva AL, Nascimento LC, Guimarães ACR, Mello JCO (2010) Reliability indices applied to performance-based mechanisms in electric power distribution systems. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 1(2):105–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Douglas JAK, Castro SF (2003) Setting of targets for continuity of supply through benchmarking. In: 17th international conference on electricity distribution, BarcelonaGoogle Scholar
  25. Farzin H, Fotuhi-Firuzabad M, Moeini-Aghtaie M (2017) Reliability studies of modern distribution systems integrated with renewable generation and parking lots. IEEE Trans Sustain Energy 8(1):431–440.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TSTE.2016.2598365 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fotuhi M, Shourkaei HM, Kharazi MB, Salimi A (2006) Reliability assessment of utilities using an enhanced reward-penalty model in performance based regulation system. In: IEEE, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  27. Fumagalli E, Schiavo L, Delestre F (2007) Service quality regulation in electricity distribution and retail. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ghasemi M, Dashti R (2018) Designing a decision model to assess the reward and penalty scheme of electric distribution companies. Energy 147(March):329–336.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.01.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. IEEE Guide for Electric Power Distribution Reliability Indices (2012) IEEE Std 1366-2012 (Revision of IEEE Std 1366-2003), May, 1–43.  https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEESTD.2012.6209381
  30. Jooshaki M, Abbaspour A, Fotuhi-Firuzabad M, Moeini-Aghtaie M, Ozdemir A (2014) A new reward-penalty mechanism for distribution companies based on concept of competition. In: IEEE, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  31. Larimi SMM, Haghifam MR, Moradkhani A (2016) Risk-based reconfiguration of active electric distribution networks. Transm Distrib IET Gener 10(4):1006–1015.  https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-gtd.2015.0777 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Latify M, Seifi H, Mashhadi HR, Sheikh-El-Eslami MK (2013) Cobweb theory-based generation maintenance coordination in restructured power systems. Gener Transm Distrib IET 7(11):1253–1262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Li F (2005) Distributed processing of reliability index assessment and reliability-based network reconfiguration in power distribution systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 20(1):230–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Li W (2013) Reliability assessment of electric power systems using Monte Carlo methods. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Lotero RC, Contreras J (2011) Distribution system planning with reliability. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 26(4):2552–2562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Modarresi MS, Fotuhi-Firuzabad M (2012) Effective design of the reward-penalty schemes to reach the highest persuasiveness in selecting investment strategies by electric distribution utilities. In: IET conference proceedings. The Institution of Engineering & Technology. http://search.proquest.com/openview/8ceb8ee32c9a215a2cf0c3284d418f20/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1936365
  37. Moeini-Aghtaie M, Farzin H, Fotuhi-Firuzabad M, Amrollahi R (2017) Generalized analytical approach to assess reliability of renewable-based energy hubs. IEEE Trans Power Syst 32(1):368–377.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2016.2549747 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mohammadnezhad-Shourkaei H, Fotuhi-Firuzabad M (2010) Impact of penalty-reward mechanism on the performance of electric distribution systems and regulator budget. Gener Transm Distrib IET 4(7):770–779CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mohammadnezhad-Shourkaei H, Fotuhi-Firuzabad M (2011) Principal requirements of designing the reward-penalty schemes for reliability improvement in distribution systems. In: Proc. 21st Int. Conf. Electricity Distribution (CIRED2011), Frankfurt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  40. Mohammadnezhad-Shourkaei H, Fotuhi-Firuzabad M, Billinton R (2011a) Integration of clustering analysis and reward/penalty mechanisms for regulating service reliability in distribution systems. Gener Transm Distrib IET 5(11):1192–1200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mohammadnezhad-Shourkaei H, Abiri-Jahromi A, Fotuhi-Firuzabad M (2011b) Incorporating service quality regulation in distribution system maintenance strategy. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 26(4):2495–2504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Moradkhani A, Haghifam MR, Abedi SM (2015) Risk-based maintenance scheduling in the presence of reward penalty scheme. Electr Power Syst Res 121:126–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mostaghim N, Haghifam, Simab M (2017) Regulation of electrical distribution companies via efficiency assessments and reward-penalty scheme. J Oper Autom Power Eng 5(1):19–30.  https://doi.org/10.22098/joape.2017.546 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nikzad M, Mozafari B (2014) Reliability assessment of incentive- and priced-based demand response programs in restructured power systems. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 56(March):83–96.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2013.10.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Performance Incentives for Utilities | Synapse Energy (n.d.) Accessed May 31, 2016. http://www.synapse-energy.com/project/performance-incentives-utilities
  46. Saboorideilami S, Abdi H (2014) Developing a new risk assessment methodology for distribution system operators regulated by quality regulation considering reclosing time. J Electr Eng Technol 9(4):1154–1162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shiwen Y, Hui H, Chengzhi W, Hao G, Hao F (2017) Review on risk assessment of power system. In: Procedia computer science, 8th international conference on ambient systems, networks and technologies, ANT-2017 and the 7th international conference on sustainable energy information technology, SEIT 2017, 16–19 May 2017, Madeira, Portugal, vol 109 (January), pp 1200–1205.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.05.399
  48. Simab M, Haghifam MR (2012) Quality performance based regulation through designing reward and penalty scheme for electric distribution companies. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 43(1):539–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Simab M, Alvehag K, Söder L, Haghifam M-R (2012) Designing reward and penalty scheme in performance based regulation for electric distribution companies. Gener Transm Distrib IET 6(9):893–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Simab M, Chatrsimab S, Yazdi S, Simab A (2017) A new method for power system contingency ranking using combination of neural network and data envelopment analysis. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 32(6):3859–3866.  https://doi.org/10.3233/IFS-162169 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Synapse Energy |. (n.d.) Accessed 15 Aug 2016. http://www.synapse-energy.com/
  52. Tanure JE, Tahan CMV, Lima JM (2006) Establishing quality performance of distribution companies based on yardstick regulation. IEEE Trans Power Syst 21(3):1148–1153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wang J, Lu J, Bie Z, You S, Cao X (2014) Long-term maintenance scheduling of smart distribution system through a PSO-TS algorithm. J Appl Math 2014:694086.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/694086 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wangdee W (2005) Bulk electric system reliability simulation and application PhD thesis, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  55. Xu N, Wen F, Huang M, Dong Z (2007) Optimal parameter setting of performance based regulation with reward and penalty. In: IEEE, pp 2740–2744Google Scholar
  56. Yahav K, Oron G, Young W (2008) Reliability assessment and performance based incentives of power distribution systems. In: IEEE, pp 222–226Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Reliability Engineering, Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM), India and The Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Electrical Engineering, Computing and Mathematical SciencesCurtin UniversityPerthAustralia
  2. 2.School of ManagementCurtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations