IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v112y2019icp797-812.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The importance of time resolution, operational flexibility and risk aversion in quantifying the value of energy storage in long-term energy planning studies

Author

Listed:
  • Diaz, Gabriel
  • Inzunza, Andrés
  • Moreno, Rodrigo

Abstract

This paper analyzes the impact of modeling detail in long-term energy planning models when assessing the value of energy storage in electricity markets. By running six optimization models for the long-term planning of combined generation and storage installed capacities in the Chilean electricity system (each with different levels of detail/complexity in terms of time resolution, recognition of operational inflexibility —i.e. technical constraints of power plants— and recognition of uncertainty in fossil fuel prices), we determine six portfolio solutions with significantly different levels of energy storage installed capacity. Furthermore, we found that the total installed capacity of storage plants escalates when increasing the level of modeling complexity, which can be achieved by augmenting the time resolution and the number of constraints that better recognize the inflexibility of generation plants and by acknowledging the presence of long-term uncertainties associated with fossil fuel prices fluctuations. In our particular study, we found a difference of more than an order of magnitude between the amount of installed capacity of storage plants determined by the detailed model (that with hourly resolution and full consideration of technical constraints of power plants) and that obtained by the planning model that adopts the traditional assumptions commonly utilized in regulatory offices around the word (i.e. low time resolution and no recognition of technical/unit commitment constraints and uncertainty). Particularly, we found that the traditional, simplified solution can deliver an installed capacity of storage plants as low as 240 MW (∼1.3% of estimated peak demand), while one of the most sophisticated solutions (which recognizes technical constraints of generating units, but ignores risks) delivers 7.8 GW (∼41.7% of estimated peak demand). Moreover, by running a risk-constrained stochastic planning model, we also determine a risk-averse portfolio solution, which demonstrated the increased value of energy storage capacity in reducing electricity cost risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Diaz, Gabriel & Inzunza, Andrés & Moreno, Rodrigo, 2019. "The importance of time resolution, operational flexibility and risk aversion in quantifying the value of energy storage in long-term energy planning studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 797-812.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:112:y:2019:i:c:p:797-812
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2019.06.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032119303879
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2019.06.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Inzunza, Andrés & Moreno, Rodrigo & Bernales, Alejandro & Rudnick, Hugh, 2016. "CVaR constrained planning of renewable generation with consideration of system inertial response, reserve services and demand participation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 104-117.
    2. Munoz, Francisco D. & van der Weijde, Adriaan Hendrik & Hobbs, Benjamin F. & Watson, Jean-Paul, 2017. "Does risk aversion affect transmission and generation planning? A Western North America case study," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 213-225.
    3. Shimon Awerbuch, 2006. "Portfolio-Based Electricity Generation Planning: Policy Implications For Renewables And Energy Security," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 693-710, May.
    4. Haller, Markus & Ludig, Sylvie & Bauer, Nico, 2012. "Bridging the scales: A conceptual model for coordinated expansion of renewable power generation, transmission and storage," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 2687-2695.
    5. Roques, Fabien A. & Newbery, David M. & Nuttall, William J., 2008. "Fuel mix diversification incentives in liberalized electricity markets: A Mean-Variance Portfolio theory approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 1831-1849, July.
    6. Welsch, Manuel & Deane, Paul & Howells, Mark & Ó Gallachóir, Brian & Rogan, Fionn & Bazilian, Morgan & Rogner, Hans-Holger, 2014. "Incorporating flexibility requirements into long-term energy system models – A case study on high levels of renewable electricity penetration in Ireland," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 600-615.
    7. Pina, André & Silva, Carlos & Ferrão, Paulo, 2011. "Modeling hourly electricity dynamics for policy making in long-term scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 4692-4702, September.
    8. Go, Roderick S. & Munoz, Francisco D. & Watson, Jean-Paul, 2016. "Assessing the economic value of co-optimized grid-scale energy storage investments in supporting high renewable portfolio standards," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 902-913.
    9. Delarue, Erik & De Jonghe, Cedric & Belmans, Ronnie & D'haeseleer, William, 2011. "Applying portfolio theory to the electricity sector: Energy versus power," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 12-23, January.
    10. Zhu, Lei & Fan, Ying, 2010. "Optimization of China's generating portfolio and policy implications based on portfolio theory," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1391-1402.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Möbius, Thomas & Riepin, Iegor & Müsgens, Felix & van der Weijde, Adriaan H., 2023. "Risk aversion and flexibility options in electricity markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    2. Muñoz, Francisco D. & Suazo-Martínez, Carlos & Pereira, Eduardo & Moreno, Rodrigo, 2021. "Electricity market design for low-carbon and flexible systems: Room for improvement in Chile," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(PB).
    3. Vinicius Braga Ferreira da Costa & Gabriel Nasser Doyle de Doile & Gustavo Troiano & Bruno Henriques Dias & Benedito Donizeti Bonatto & Tiago Soares & Walmir de Freitas Filho, 2022. "Electricity Markets in the Context of Distributed Energy Resources and Demand Response Programs: Main Developments and Challenges Based on a Systematic Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-43, October.
    4. Merrick, James H. & Bistline, John E.T. & Blanford, Geoffrey J., 2024. "On representation of energy storage in electricity planning models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    5. Pesantez, Jorge E. & Li, Binbin & Lee, Christopher & Zhao, Zhizhen & Butala, Mark & Stillwell, Ashlynn S., 2023. "A Comparison Study of Predictive Models for Electricity Demand in a Diverse Urban Environment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 283(C).
    6. Martin, Nigel & Rice, John, 2021. "Power outages, climate events and renewable energy: Reviewing energy storage policy and regulatory options for Australia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    7. Ambrosius, Mirjam & Egerer, Jonas & Grimm, Veronika & van der Weijde, Adriaan H., 2022. "Risk aversion in multilevel electricity market models with different congestion pricing regimes," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    8. Fernando J. Lanas & Francisco J. Martínez-Conde & Diego Alvarado & Rodrigo Moreno & Patricio Mendoza-Araya & Guillermo Jiménez-Estévez, 2020. "Non-Strategic Capacity Withholding from Distributed Energy Storage within Microgrids Providing Energy and Reserve Services," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-14, October.
    9. John E. T. Bistline & David T. Young, 2022. "The role of natural gas in reaching net-zero emissions in the electric sector," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.
    10. Gonzato, Sebastian & Bruninx, Kenneth & Delarue, Erik, 2021. "Long term storage in generation expansion planning models with a reduced temporal scope," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    11. Jain, A. & Yamujala, S. & Gaur, A. & Das, P. & Bhakar, R. & Mathur, J., 2023. "Power sector decarbonization planning considering renewable resource variability and system operational constraints," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 331(C).
    12. Inzunza, Andrés & Muñoz, Francisco D. & Moreno, Rodrigo, 2021. "Measuring the effects of environmental policies on electricity markets risk," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    13. Thomas Mobius & Iegor Riepin & Felix Musgens & Adriaan H. van der Weijde, 2021. "Risk aversion in flexible electricity markets," Papers 2110.04088, arXiv.org.
    14. Prina, Matteo Giacomo & Nastasi, Benedetto & Groppi, Daniele & Misconel, Steffi & Garcia, Davide Astiaso & Sparber, Wolfram, 2022. "Comparison methods of energy system frameworks, models and scenario results," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    15. Pengran Zhou & Pengfei Zhou & Serhat Yüksel & Hasan Dinçer & Gülsüm Sena Uluer, 2019. "Balanced Scorecard-Based Evaluation of Sustainable Energy Investment Projects with IT2 Fuzzy Hybrid Decision Making Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    16. Saberi-Beglar, Kasra & Zare, Kazem & Seyedi, Heresh & Marzband, Mousa & Nojavan, Sayyad, 2023. "Risk-embedded scheduling of a CCHP integrated with electric vehicle parking lot in a residential energy hub considering flexible thermal and electrical loads," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 329(C).
    17. Bistline, John & Blanford, Geoffrey & Mai, Trieu & Merrick, James, 2021. "Modeling variable renewable energy and storage in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    18. Siala, Kais & Mier, Mathias & Schmidt, Lukas & Torralba-Díaz, Laura & Sheykhha, Siamak & Savvidis, Georgios, 2022. "Which model features matter? An experimental approach to evaluate power market modeling choices," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    19. Acevedo, Giancarlo & Bernales, Alejandro & Flores, Andrés & Inzunza, Andrés & Moreno, Rodrigo, 2021. "The effect of environmental policies on risk reductions in energy generation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Inzunza, Andrés & Muñoz, Francisco D. & Moreno, Rodrigo, 2021. "Measuring the effects of environmental policies on electricity markets risk," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    2. Pérez Odeh, Rodrigo & Watts, David & Flores, Yarela, 2018. "Planning in a changing environment: Applications of portfolio optimisation to deal with risk in the electricity sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3808-3823.
    3. Acevedo, Giancarlo & Bernales, Alejandro & Flores, Andrés & Inzunza, Andrés & Moreno, Rodrigo, 2021. "The effect of environmental policies on risk reductions in energy generation," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    4. Costa, Oswaldo L.V. & de Oliveira Ribeiro, Celma & Rego, Erik Eduardo & Stern, Julio Michael & Parente, Virginia & Kileber, Solange, 2017. "Robust portfolio optimization for electricity planning: An application based on the Brazilian electricity mix," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 158-169.
    5. Paulino Martinez-Fernandez & Fernando deLlano-Paz & Anxo Calvo-Silvosa & Isabel Soares, 2019. "Assessing Renewable Energy Sources for Electricity (RES-E) Potential Using a CAPM-Analogous Multi-Stage Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-20, September.
    6. Paulino Martinez-Fernandez & Fernando deLlano-Paz & Anxo Calvo-Silvosa & Isabel Soares, 2018. "Pollutant versus non-pollutant generation technologies: a CML-analogous analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 199-212, December.
    7. Inzunza, Andrés & Moreno, Rodrigo & Bernales, Alejandro & Rudnick, Hugh, 2016. "CVaR constrained planning of renewable generation with consideration of system inertial response, reserve services and demand participation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 104-117.
    8. Bergen, Matías & Muñoz, Francisco D., 2018. "Quantifying the effects of uncertain climate and environmental policies on investments and carbon emissions: A case study of Chile," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 261-273.
    9. Yang, Yingkui & Solgaard, Hans Stubbe & Haider, Wolfgang, 2016. "Wind, hydro or mixed renewable energy source: Preference for electricity products when the share of renewable energy increases," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 521-531.
    10. Zhang, Mingming & Tang, Yamei & Liu, Liyun & Zhou, Dequn, 2022. "Optimal investment portfolio strategies for power enterprises under multi-policy scenarios of renewable energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    11. Losekann, Luciano & Marrero, Gustavo A. & Ramos-Real, Francisco J. & de Almeida, Edmar Luiz Fagundes, 2013. "Efficient power generating portfolio in Brazil: Conciliating cost, emissions and risk," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 301-314.
    12. Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & MacGill, Iain F., 2013. "Assessing the value of wind generation in future carbon constrained electricity industries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 400-412.
    13. Ioannou, Anastasia & Angus, Andrew & Brennan, Feargal, 2017. "Risk-based methods for sustainable energy system planning: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 602-615.
    14. Pérez Odeh, Rodrigo & Watts, David & Negrete-Pincetic, Matías, 2018. "Portfolio applications in electricity markets review: Private investor and manager perspective trends," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 192-204.
    15. Zhang, Shuang & Zhao, Tao & Xie, Bai-Chen, 2018. "What is the optimal power generation mix of China? An empirical analysis using portfolio theory," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 522-536.
    16. Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & MacGill, Iain F., 2012. "Portfolio assessments for future generation investment in newly industrializing countries – A case study of Thailand," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 1044-1058.
    17. Vithayasrichareon, Peerapat & MacGill, Iain F., 2014. "Incorporating short-term operational plant constraints into assessments of future electricity generation portfolios," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 144-155.
    18. Shahriari, Mehdi & Blumsack, Seth, 2018. "The capacity value of optimal wind and solar portfolios," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 992-1005.
    19. Fuss, Sabine & Szolgayová, Jana & Khabarov, Nikolay & Obersteiner, Michael, 2012. "Renewables and climate change mitigation: Irreversible energy investment under uncertainty and portfolio effects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 59-68.
    20. Botor, Benjamin & Böcker, Benjamin & Kallabis, Thomas & Weber, Christoph, 2021. "Information shocks and profitability risks for power plant investments – impacts of policy instruments," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:112:y:2019:i:c:p:797-812. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.