A framework for joint management of regional water-energy ... - Orbit

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Net costs [10 6 EUR/year] 2000 CI Z Z 1800 1600 1400 1200 Net costs [10 6 EUR/year] 2000 CI Z Z 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 1000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Figure 19. Convergence of a) disaggregated and b) aggregated model. (CI is the confidence interval) The mean storage was very similar in the aggregated and disaggregated models (Figure 20a), and resulted from a policy of producing hydropower during the winter and summer demand peaks. Although the releases also followed a similar trend (Figure 20b), those from the aggregated model were higher from May to July, because irrigation was prioritized. In contrast, releases from the disaggregated model were higher during January–February and September– October, at the expense of higher irrigation curtailments. Energy storage [GWh] 15000 12500 10000 7500 5000 Aggregated Disaggregated Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Energy releases [GWh/week] 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 Aggregated Disaggregated Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure 20. Total energy storage (a) and energy releases (b) in aggregated and disaggregated models Despite storage similarities between the models, the river basins from the disaggregated model showed distinct storage strategies (Figure 21): storage in Tajo, Ebro, Duero and Miño-Sil was released before the beginning of the inflow season in October; whereas the storage in Guadalquivir, Guadiana and Jucar was never depleted. 40
Relative storage 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 Tajo Ebro Duero Guadalquivir Guadiana Jucar Miño−Sil 0.2 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Figure 21. Mean weekly relative energy storage defined as . As shown in Table 9, Irrigation allocations were also different between the aggregated and disaggregated models. Because the disaggregated model contained information about the energy equivalent of irrigation water demand in each catchment, inefficient allocations were curtailed. This information was averaged out in the aggregated model, so most allocations were not curtailed. More specifically, allocations were curtailed for crops with irrigation marginal benefits lower than the sum of replacement cost of power lost to irrigation sinks and the opportunity costs of generating hydropower at the current (instead of at a later) stage: f+cg
Page 1:
A framework for joint management of
Page 4 and 5:
Silvio Javier Pereira-Cardenal A fr
Page 7 and 8: Acknowledgements I will always be g
Page 9 and 10: with the highest price, which can o
Page 11 and 12: og dermed værdien af vandkraft på
Page 13: Table of contents 1 Introduction ..
Page 16 and 17: xii
Page 18 and 19: Recognizing the problem’s complex
Page 20 and 21: whereas medium- and long-term tradi
Page 22 and 23: allocations contribute to the compe
Page 25 and 26: 3 Case study: The Iberian Peninsula
Page 27 and 28: Production of biofuels, which is en
Page 29 and 30: Figure 2. Mean annual irrigation re
Page 31 and 32: Price [EUR/MWh] 80 60 40 20 Price P
Page 33 and 34: Table 4. Characteristics of generat
Page 35: Figure 7. Temperature change factor
Page 38 and 39: The constraints are mathematical ex
Page 40 and 41: The weekly transition probability m
Page 42 and 43: values θ (€/MWh) for each inflow
Page 44 and 45: generate the backward openings (see
Page 46 and 47: The change in the objective functio
Page 48 and 49: where represents the standard dev
Page 51 and 52: 5 Results and Discussion The main f
Page 53 and 54: ment decision (and their constraint
Page 55: 15000 a Power market 20000 a Power
Page 59: eservoirs, although some level of a
Page 62 and 63: The suggested method relies on math
Page 65 and 66: 8 References Al-Sunaidy A, Green R
Page 67 and 68: Hoffman AR (2010) The Water-Energy
Page 69 and 70: Schaefli B, Hingray B, Musy A (2007
Page 71: 9 Papers I. Pereira-Cardenal, S.J.,
show all

A framework for joint management of regional water-energy ... - Orbit

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?