Sharing of Inter-State Transmission Losses

10/10/2011

Introduction
Losses are physical phenomenon while transportation of electric energy from generation to load
Fixed losses
core or iron losses in transformers, losses in shunt devices such as shunt reactors, shunt capacitors etc SVC, part of losses in HVDC terminals and other FACTS devices Generally depend on system voltage and thus constant.

Variable losses (I2R)

Copper losses in transformers, transmission lines Depend on load current Load current varies with quantum of load and thus variable Resistance of lines and thus on line lengths

In transmission system variable losses >> fixed losses

Thus generally losses proportional to load and distance of transportation
10/10/2011 2

Introduction
Development of ISTS system
1960-70: State systems connected with few inter-state lines, 1970-80: Development of Central Generators and their associated transmission system. 1991: POWER GRID came in existence and transfer of associated system to new company Post 2k/2003: ISTS licensees

Treatment of losses
Individual line losses Associated Transmission losses with individual generator Pooled losses

10/10/2011

Introduction
Sharing of Transmission losses
1960-70: Based on drawal on individual lines on some mutual/collective understanding 1970-80: based on drawal or actual energy allocation from concerned generator. 1990: Regional Pooled losses with some exceptions in proportion to the energy drawal. Post ABT: Estimated Regional Pooled losses in proportions to schedules from Grid. In all above drawee utilities used to bear the losses

Inter-regional Transactions:
Regional (whether pooled or otherwise) losses and inter-regional link losses. Inter-regional link losses merged with regional pool Thus regional postage stamp for losses.
10/10/2011 4

Introduction
Other changes
Sharing of losses for some state networks
In schedules.. SR In actuals NR

Operation of POWER EXCHANGES in 2008

Based on point of connection (connection to which region) Injector /drawee both have to bear losses Wheeling region losses only if studies prove it.

10/10/2011

New Regulation for sharing of losses

CERC Regulation on sharing of ISTS charges and losses Regulation notified in in June 2010 NLDC has prepared procedure in compliance with Regulation 6(1) Formation of Implementation committee and various meetings of Implementation committee Validation Committee Final approval of the commission for implementation Implemented w.e.f 1st July 2011

10/10/2011

International Practices Prevalent

Losses settled
Paid
In kind In Money

Settled
For each balancing period on daily, weekly or yearly

Paid by
Only drawee Both injector and drawee In some adhoc ratio 50:50 or 45:55

Loss allocation factors may have two component

Fixed and variable(based on location, season, time of the day)

Paid based
on after the fact on figures declared upfront
10/10/2011 7

Issues in Recovery of Transmission Losses

System Operation Requirement
Losses are physical in nature and thus to be supplied in real time Loss compensation shall be as actual losses in real time so that proper load generation balance is maintained.

Market Operation Requirement

Losses to be known in advance (as long as possible)
to plan for future scenario to make bid/price strategy

Calculation of individual payout is easy. Whole process is transparent Allocation is fair

Overall requirement
Administration of losses is easy
10/10/2011 8

Loss sharing Methodsexplained in literature

Loss allocation is a complex issue. To date no single loss allocation method has been universally accepted to be the most precise or the best one. Globally, different markets adopt different loss allocation schemes which suit their market structure. Various commonly followed methods are

Pro rata allocation Proportional sharing Marginal / Incremental loss allocation Loss allocation methods using the admittance matrix Each of the above mentioned method has its own advantages and limitations.
10/10/2011 9

Loss sharing Methods Pro rata allocation

This is the method was till recently being followed in India. Under this, the loss is shared among the beneficiaries on pro-rata basis in a pre-defined manner, based on schedules/shares. It is relatively a simple method to use, however this does not take in to account the geographic distribution of the loads and the generators and is not sensitive to distance and direction. Since the losses are socialized, the calculations are simple and clear.

10/10/2011

10

Loss sharing Methods Proportional sharing

In this method it is assumed that the inflow of power in to the bus is to be proportionally shared by all the out going feeders and the tracing of power between the generator and the load is to be achieved. It works on the principle that the loss of each line is to be shared by the loads in proportion to the power flow attributable to them and the respective losses are to be borne by the generators or the load. However the assumption of the proportional sharing of power may not always meet the electrical power flow laws and power tracing may also give erroneous results, particularly in the situations like loop flows and under such situations more assumptions have to be made to trace the power flows.
10/10/2011 11

Loss sharing Methods Marginal / Incremental loss allocation

Under this method losses are determined on the logic that any marginal change in bus injection/drawl leads to marginal change in the losses. Choosing of slack bus and handling of negative loss allocation etc, are some of the issues of this method

10/10/2011

12

Some further References

IEEE Trans Power System pp631-637 May 2000 A Physical flow based approach to allocating transmission losses ............. IEEE Trans Power System pp143-150 Feb 2000 Allocation of transmission losses to bilateral contracts....... IEEE Trans Power System vol16 pp105 110 Feb 2001 Z 'Z' Bus loss allocation IEEE Trans Power System vol 17 pp 26-33 Feb 2002 Incremental transmission loss allocation under pool dispatch.... IEEE Trans Power System vol 15 pp184-188 Feb 2000 Fair allocation of transmission power losses IEEE Trans Power System vol17 no3 pp571-576 Aug 2002 Transmission loss allocation: A comparison of different practical algorithms.

10/10/2011

13

Procedure for sharing of losses based on June 2010 regulation of CERC

Procedure for Sharing of ISTS Losses
Prepared by NLDC in compliance with Regulation 6(1)

The procedure aims to keep computation:

Simple Non-Recursive

Loss Application on Regional Basis

In line with existing practice No Pan caking.

Injection and withdrawal loss calculated for each zone.

10/10/2011 14

New Methodology
Point of Connection Losses
Independent of Contract Path

50% PoC losses + 50% Uniform Losses Uniform Loss component

Based on Regional Losses

Moderation of Losses
Based on Actual Regional Losses and Losses based on studies

10/10/2011

15

PoC Loss Computation (1)

Computation of changes in losses in the system due to incremental injection / withdrawal at each node.

Loss Allocation Factor

10/10/2011

16

PoC Loss Computation (2)

Output of System Studies
Loss Allocation Factor MW Losses of each node Weighted average losses (%) for each region

Zonal Loss : Weighted Average of losses at each node Moderation of Zonal Losses One PoC Loss for each entity per week

10/10/2011

NRLDC

17

Loss Sharing Mechanism

Software Provided by CERC

Calculation of Losses from SEM Data

Total Losses based on PoC

Zonal Losses as Computed from Hybrid Method Moderation Of PoC Losses

Total Losses (50% PoC+50%UC)

10/10/2011

NRLDC

18

Moderation of Losses (1)

Need of Moderation
Difference in actual and study scenarios Correct computation of injection and drawal schedule of various utilities. Scheduled losses to be closer to actual losses in the system so that system mismatch is avoided. Minimizing the mismatch between UI payable and receivable

Moderation at regional Level Moderation Factor

= Actual Losses of previous week (Aact) ( In %) -----------------------------------------------------------------Regional Losses based on Studies (As)(In %)
10/10/2011 19

Regional Losses Based on Studies (As) Weighted average Actual losses of a region Actual Transmission losses (in MWh) in Regional ISTS, L = Injection of Regional Entities G + Interregional injection I) - (Regional Entity drawals +Interregional drawals) Actual Percentage Regional losses, l = L*100/ (G+I) This would be computed for each 15 min time block and then averaged for each week.

10/10/2011

20

Application of Losses in Scheduling

Net PoC Loss = 50% Moderated PoC Loss + 50% Uniform Loss for last 1 year Provision of 3 slabs : each injection / withdrawal zone to be placed in low / average / high slab 50% of previous week loss average slab Low slab 0.3% less, high slab 0.3% higher Loss to be applied on each regional entity Drawee Entity to bear full losses for :
Long Term Transactions

Injecting Entity and Drawee Entity to share losses for:

Short Term Transaction
Collective Transactions Bilateral Transactions
10/10/2011 21

Case I : Intra-Regional Long Term Transactions

Zone A B
B Moderated Loss (%)

3 5

92.15 MW 100 MW

10/10/2011

22

Case II : Inter Regional Long Term Transactions

Zone A B
B Moderated Loss (%)

3 5

92.15 MW
A

97 MW

100 MW

10/10/2011

23

Case III : Long Term Transactions Involving Wheeling Region

Zone
B Moderated Loss (%)

A B

3 5

92.15 MW

97 MW
A

97 MW

100 MW

10/10/2011

24

Case IV : Intra-Regional Short Term Transactions

Zone A
100 MW Contract
Moderated Loss (%)

3 5

95 MW

103.09 MW

10/10/2011

25

Case V : Inter Regional Short Term Transactions

100 MW Contract

Zone A B

Moderated Loss (%)

3 5

95 MW
A

100 MW

103.09 MW

10/10/2011

26

Case VI : Short Term Transactions Involving Wheeling Region

100 MW Contract
B

95 MW

100 MW
A

100 MW

103.09 MW

10/10/2011

27

Thank You!