A framework for joint management of regional water-energy ... - Orbit
A framework for joint management of regional water-energy ... - Orbit
A framework for joint management of regional water-energy ... - Orbit
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Equivalent reservoir level [%]<br />
a<br />
Very dry<br />
80<br />
60<br />
70<br />
60<br />
60<br />
65<br />
40<br />
150<br />
65<br />
70 1300 900 150 70<br />
20<br />
80<br />
60 60<br />
40<br />
20<br />
65<br />
80 50<br />
60<br />
40<br />
20<br />
80<br />
40<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
20<br />
80<br />
40<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
20<br />
70<br />
150<br />
65<br />
Dry<br />
Average<br />
60<br />
65<br />
900 70 70<br />
60 60<br />
70<br />
150 70<br />
65<br />
900<br />
0<br />
60<br />
70<br />
65<br />
40 50<br />
60 65<br />
Wet<br />
150<br />
Very wet<br />
70 70<br />
J F M A M J J A S O N D<br />
70<br />
65<br />
65<br />
60<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
50<br />
40<br />
50<br />
b<br />
50<br />
50 50<br />
58<br />
40 40<br />
40<br />
40<br />
70<br />
145<br />
70<br />
145<br />
50<br />
Very dry<br />
58<br />
Dry<br />
58<br />
1300 900 145 70<br />
900<br />
50 50<br />
58<br />
58<br />
0<br />
40<br />
50<br />
58<br />
50<br />
58<br />
Average<br />
Wet<br />
70 145<br />
900<br />
Very wet<br />
70145<br />
J F M A M J J A S O N D<br />
70<br />
58<br />
70<br />
58<br />
58<br />
50<br />
50<br />
40<br />
50<br />
40<br />
c<br />
51.6 51.6<br />
60<br />
51.6<br />
40<br />
150<br />
60<br />
Very dry<br />
Dry<br />
1300 900 60 150<br />
150 900<br />
60<br />
51.6<br />
51.6 51.6<br />
60<br />
900<br />
150 60<br />
40<br />
0<br />
51.6<br />
51.6 40<br />
Average<br />
Wet<br />
60 150<br />
Very wet<br />
40<br />
51.6<br />
40 40<br />
51.6<br />
J F M A M J J A S O N D<br />
60<br />
Figure 16. Water values [€/MWh] from optimization a) considering the power market, b)<br />
assuming a monthly-varying hydropower price, and c) assuming a constant price.<br />
occurred during the irrigation season, when the total benefits (constant hydropower<br />
plus irrigation) were highest (Figure 17c).<br />
Representing hydropower benefits through a power market provided more<br />
realistic results. The reservoir was not completely emptied during the autumn<br />
—as it occurs in the other two approaches— because <strong>of</strong> high <strong>water</strong> values at<br />
low reservoir levels (Figure 18c). Furthermore, reservoir operation changed<br />
depending on inflow conditions, resulting in low storage during dry years and<br />
high storage during wet years.<br />
These results indicate that using constant power prices (e.g. Cai et al., 2003)<br />
does not reflect the inflow and power demand seasonality, which affects the<br />
availability (and there<strong>for</strong>e the value) <strong>of</strong> hydropower. Monthly-varying power<br />
prices (e.g. Tilmant and Kelman, 2007) capture seasonal effects, but can<br />
cause unrealistic operation rules that can only be avoided through additional<br />
constraints. Using a simple power market to represent hydropower benefits<br />
provides reservoir operation policies that are more realistic, and that adapt<br />
better to changing inflow conditions.<br />
38
Change language