24th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, 21-25 September 2009, Hamburg, Germany

IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW EUROPEAN GRID CODES FOR LARGE SCALE PV SYSTEMS

Dipl.-Ing. V. Wachenfeld

SMA Solar Technology AG

Sonnenallee 1, 34266 Niestetal, Germany Tel.: (0561) 9522-3327, Fax: (0561) 9522-4896 E-mail: Volker.Wachenfeld@SMA.de

ABSTRACT: An increasing share of renewable suppliers in todays energy mix is shifting the focus of distribution (DSOs) and transmission grid operators (TSOs) towards the question of future grid stability. To guarantee a stabile distribution grid, new grid codes are established stipulating ancillary services and integration into grid management structures. The new grid code Erzeugungsanlagen am Mittelspannungsnetz of the German Energy and Water Industries Association (BDEW) just like other comparable guidelines in various European countries demonstrate a significant paradigm shift: whereas system operators have perceived PV systems or other decentralized generation technologies as something similar to negative loads, they are now considered as actual power plants. Todays PV system technology is ready to meet the requirements of these grid codes. State of the art inverter systems allow the implementation of fast control structures, e.g. applying the MPP tracking algorithms to instantly reduce the power output of the system on demand - without any need for additional components like dump loads or power chopper switches. Demanding capability to provide reactive power is currently relocating the focus of new inverter design from last decades drive to maximize efficiency only to a full range of functionalities. But transferring reactive power capability into a standard requirement at any point of interconnection will cause dispensable losses, reduce the achievable energy yield by not allowing to utilize technology with maximum efficiency and thus might put the payoff of the system at risk. System operators are now in demand to consider a sense of proportion to avoid unnecessary constraints for a steadily increasing share of renewable energy.

INTRODUCTION: GERMAN AND FRENCH CODES FOR MEDIUM VOLTAGE GRIDS

The German Association of Energy and Water Industries (BDEW) finally released its new grid code Generating Plants Connected to the Medium-Voltage Network [1] to transfer standards already implemented for transmission or high voltage distribution grids to the medium voltage level. What looked like a completely new compilation of requirements for decentralized generation was in fact consequently based on the established Transmission Code 2007 [2] and Distribution Code 2007 [3], standards defined by BDEWs antecessor VDN (Association of System Operators), as well as particular standards of transmission system operators (TSOs), e.g. eon in 2006 [4] and Vattenfall in 2008 [5]. Both TSOs established their codes to deal with an increasing share of wind energy generation connected to their specific grid area, eon in Schleswig-Holstein and Niedersachsen, Vattenfall in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Sachsen-Anhalt. With big wind farms as a driver, decentralized generation moved into the focus of grid stability analysis. With 20 GW already feeding in 2006, nearly 50 % of the minimal load of the German grid could have been supplied by wind power. To guarantee grid stability, TSOs defined rules for grid interconnection dealing with standard topics like grid protection or treatment of the neutral as well as typical issues known from conventional power plants like reactive power exchange or behavior under fault conditions. But even if it seems that mainly German system operators are speeding up the process at the moment, other European countries with relevant shares of renewable energies connected to the grid are aware of the questions of grid stability.

The French government made these issues subject to national legislation an enacted a law in April 2008 [6], demanding the capability to deliver reactive power or stay connected during a voltage dip. Spanish legislation is estimated to follow soon, and even if the German statutory ordinance for wind energy Verordnung zu Systemdienstleistungen durch Windenergieanlagen SDLWindV [7] is concentrating on wind energy today, a similar regulation for PV is much likely to follow. Figure 1 is presenting an overview time schedule for the introduction of ancillary service requirements for grid tie PV system in Germany.

Figure 1: Time schedule for the introduction of ancillary service requirements for grid tie PV system in Germany 2 NEW REQUIREMENTS: ANCILLARY SERVICES AND SYSTEM CONTROL

When the BDEW published the first drafts of a new standard for parallel operation of generators with the medium voltage grid, the paradigm shift in the mind set of system operators towards decentralized generation

3861

24th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, 21-25 September 2009, Hamburg, Germany

became obvious. Whereas the requirements in 1998s version of the VDEW standard for parallel operation with the medium voltage grid [8] do not substantially make a difference between generator and load behavior, renewable energies today are seen as real power plants and thus required to contribute to grid stability. The discussion is not yet finalized regarding the question if this contribution is more or less a basic requirement (following the TSOs and DSOs point of view) or a variety of ancillary services providing added value for grid operation. The new requirements cover - besides tightened limits for harmonics, flicker and other interference issues - features to support both static and dynamic grid stability. In general, the following functionalities have to be provided by all kind of generation units: Generation Management: Active power supply has to be reduced to a target value by remote control to avoid bottleneck situations in transmission grids (also required by German renewable energy act EEG 2009 [9]) Decentralized reactive power control: Provision of reactive power to avoid additional losses and maintain grid voltage Reduction of active power supply as a function of the grid frequency: Provision of negative reserve power by reduction of the power output to avoid oscillations in case of an imbalanced load and generation situation Under-voltage ride through capability: Systems have to stay connected in case of voltage dips and support the grid voltage by supplying reactive current 3 IMPLEMENTATION OF NEW REQUIREMENTS INTO PV INVERTER TECHNOLOGY

can be put into practice. As mentioned above, the power output of a PV system can easily be reduced by voltage control. Under normal conditions, PV systems are operated at the maximum power point (MPP) of the PV generator. The control algorithm identifies this MPP by a tracking procedure. Increasing or decreasing the DC voltage starting from the MPP automatically reduces the generated power without additional equipment like brake choppers or dump loads. The BDEW standards requires a reduction of the power in steps of at least 10 % of their rated values, any target set point to be reached within one minute. Figure 2 shows the behavior of a state of the art PV string inverter exposed with different target values. The control algorithm is fast enough to reduce the supplied output power within less than one second.

Figure 2: Example for generation management implemented in Sunny Mini Central 11000 TLRP In contrast to the fast reaction time of the inverter control, the primary challenge for generation management in large scale PV plants will be the decentralized plant architecture. As a consequence of the extensive DC power distribution, even Multi-MW systems are actualized by parceling the PV generator into various sub-generators, each one equipped with one dedicated inverter. Depending on the generator construction, a 20 MW ground based PV installation can consist of 20 inverters with 1 MW rated power. On the other hand, a 20 MW double-axis tracking system with one dedicated string inverter for each tracker might require more than 2,000 inverters, each with less than 10 kW rated power. Anyway, a target value, provided via remote control, has to be distributed to numerous inverters. The most efficient way to handle the modular design of PV plants is to use existing monitoring structures. System supervision is a standard for large scale PV systems to ensure the availability of the installation and thus the economic viability of the investment. These structures can be extended by some analogue or digital inputs to import the remote target value and a communication structure to transport the information to each inverter in the plant within less than one minute. Figure 3 shows a solution using SMAs Power Reducer Box (PRB) to import the remote commands of the system operator, e.g. the state of the art solution of German DSOs providing 4 discrete relays to reduce the power output to zero, 30 %, 60 % or just rated power. The PRB uses a high speed protocol to distribute this information to each inverter coupled to the existing monitoring bus without any additional infrastructure costs.

The above mentioned functionalities have to be provided by any kind of decentralized generation systems neither German nor French or Spanish grid codes will differentiate between wind, biomass or PV power supply. Nevertheless, the different generation technologies can provide specific benefits for grid stability and might as well avoid drawbacks by not meeting all of the specified requirements. The characteristics of PV systems is mainly determined by the inverter technology. The PV generator is from the aspect of control engineering just a manageable DC source and has no significant impact on the grid interconnection behavior of the system. Active power output reduction can easily put into practice by DC voltage control, and todays state of the art inverter technology can be adapted to provide reactive power with foreseeable effort. Generally speaking, PV looks like the perfect partner for any kind of grid stability control mechanisms. 3.1 Generation Management Generation management functionalities have to be implemented in decentralized energy supply structures to guarantee the security of supply in case of bottleneck situations in the transmission grid. By allowing the system operator to reduce the supplied power of all connected power plants via remote control, the capacity of the existing grid can be exploited to its maximum at least to bridge the time gap until grid expansion actions

3862

24th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, 21-25 September 2009, Hamburg, Germany

Figure 3: Distribution of generation management commands via Power Reducer Box 3.2 Power-Frequency-Control Frequency oscillations in the interconnected system grid are caused by imbalanced load and generation conditions either as a consequence of a failure in a big power plant (under-frequency) or a sudden loss of load (over-frequency). In former grid codes, decentralized generation was demanded to disconnect immediately when the allowed frequency band was hurt. In case of an under-frequency, the situation got worse through losing decentralized generation. With an increasing share of renewable suppliers, the primary reserve of the European power grid (approx. 3 MW) will no longer be sufficient to avoid power losses or even blackouts. New grid codes specify expanded frequency ranges: The German BDEW standard requires operation within a frequency band between 47,5 Hz and 51,5 Hz. For PV inverter technology, this expanded frequency range will not be a big challenge. Nevertheless, the dimensioning of the power transformers, e.g. for coupling with the medium voltage grid, has to be adapted to avoid saturation effects. Over-frequencies do not appear to be that severe for grid stability at first. But the effect of losing decentralized generation is not comparable to a positive feedback. On the contrary, the loss of generation will cause an under-frequency followed by another overfrequency when the decentralized units start feeding again. These power oscillations can even result in blackouts. To avoid the oscillation, systems have to reduce their power output in case of an over-frequency. As this functionality is well known to PV inverters capable of being operated in AC coupled off gridsystems, the requirements can easily be implemented. Figure 4 shows the reaction of a Sunny Mini Central 11000 TLRP to a frequency variation starting with an over-frequency up to 51,5 Hz, followed by a reduction back to rated values.

Figure 4: Power reduction with over-frequency implemented in Sunny Mini Central 11000 TLRP 3.3 Reactive Power Supply Reactive power has become a synonym for ancillary services in general. The objective to require reactive power capability is no longer limited to the reduction of transport losses. With an increasing share of decentralized generation on the lower distribution levels (medium and low voltage grids), the maintenance of the supply voltage is moving into the focus of concern. Voltage stability is now regarded as one of the most relevant barriers to increase the capacity of the grid for decentralized generation. Different studies prove that the capability to control the voltage at the point of interconnection by reactive power supply can increase the capacity of the grid significantly. Figure 5 shows an example for low voltage grids demonstrating that a power factor of 0,95 can reduce the voltage rise by more than 20%.

Figure 5: Limitation of voltage raise by reactive power supply in low voltage grids [9] The majority of todays new grid codes require the capability to supply reactive power under normal operating conditions. The requirements range from a preset target value (e.g. cos = 0.95), defined by the system operator, up to pre-defined characteristics like a voltage-reactive power-control Q[U] or cos = f[P]. As a basic principle, pulse controlled inverter technology is perfectly suitable to supply reactive power within the full range between a maximum lagging and leading power factor, only limited by the rated AC (apparent) current of the inverter system. State of the art control algorithms can switch from leading to lagging operation within a few seconds. Figure 6 demonstrates the reaction of a Sunny Mini Central 11000 TLRP when the power factor set point is shifted from 0.8 (lagging) to 0.8 (leading).

3863

24th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, 21-25 September 2009, Hamburg, Germany

Figure 6: Shift of power factor set point from 0.8/lagging to 0.8/leading with an SMC 11000 TLRP But even if inverters can provide a wide power factor range, there is one handicap to be taken into account. State of the art high performance inverter topologies providing efficiencies of > 98 % have been optimized to supply active power only. The optimization process exploited topologies as well as semiconductor design and switching algorithms. Each switching process produces losses, thus intelligent control mechanisms are designed to minimize switching actions. Supplying reactive power and minimizing switching losses is like squaring the circle. Figure 7 compares the efficiency characteristics of a loss-optimized inverter with an identical system with reactive power capability.

depending on the grid operation policy either to avoid a significant loss of generation after clearing the failure, or to stabilize the grid voltage by supplying reactive current. In most distribution grids characterized by a relevant share of free wire overhead lines, the standard protection policy is automatic re-closure. Approximately 150 milliseconds after failure occurrence, the protection power switch will disconnect the affected grid region, and within another 300 up to 500 milliseconds, reconnect again. In most cases, the arc has been extinguished by the voltage interruption, and the failure cause, e.g. a branch of tree falling on the overhead line, was eliminated by the arc. After reconnecting, operation can continue, and a loss of generation has to be avoided. To support this protection policy, DSOs require decentralized suppliers to stay connected, but not to feed any current during the voltage dip otherwise the arc would not be extinguished. As mentioned above, PV provides two major advantages to support this functionality: the fast inverter control allows to identify the failure within milliseconds, and the behavior of PV generators in combination with the fast MPPT-algorithm to immediately reduce the power output to zero without the need to burn the surplus input power. Figure 8 shows the reaction of a Sunny Central 630 facing a voltage dip down to 10 %. During the low voltage phase, the current is reduced to zero, whereas, after voltage returns, power is available within three grid periods.

Figure 7: Efficiency comparison - reactive power capability vs. optimized switching 3.4 Low Voltage Ride Through (LVRT) The discussion regarding blackouts has become more and more intensive since November 2006, when the UCTE grid was close to a total failure. In addition to the above mentioned frequency oscillations, voltage drops caused by failures in the transmission grids are most likely to put the stability of the European power grid at hazard. A detailed analysis of a voltage dip in northern Spain demonstrated that one single failure in the 400 kVgrid led to a voltage drop of more than 20 % in more than a quarter of the whole area of Spain [10]. State of the art inverter technology would have disconnected immediately and remain off for several minutes as a consequence of former grid codes requiring an immediate disconnection in case of voltage failures. And this collective disconnection will become more and more severe with a raising share of decentralized power supply. So today we are facing a significant paradigm shift: decentralized generation shall stay connected

Figure 8: Interruption of power supply during a voltage dip down to 10 %] Transmission grids as well as distribution grids with a significant share of cabling are operated without automatic re-closure procedures. In these cases, the supply of reactive current is an appropriate means to stabilize the grid voltage and thus reduce depth and dimensions of the voltage hopper around the failure. Figure 9 demonstrates the reaction of a Sunny TriPower in LVRT-configuration, demonstrating the correlation between voltage dip (scheme 1), active current (scheme 2) and reactive current (scheme 3).

3864

24th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, 21-25 September 2009, Hamburg, Germany

LITERATURE

Figure 9: 50 % voltage dip: Replacement of active by reactive current with Sunny TriPower In case of a dip down to 50 % of the contracted voltage, the active power supply is reduced to zero, whereas the reactive current is raised up to 100 % rated system current providing a maximum stabilizing effect on the voltage at the grid interconnection point. 4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

New and upcoming grid codes mark a relevant milestone to shift decentralized generation being nothing much different from a load with negative power flow into a real power plant. This shift cannot be put into practice without defining advanced requirements regarding grid stability control. To allow the unobstructed expansion of the share of renewable power in Europe - free from limits caused by grid stability problems - it is mandatory to integrate PV, Wind and other sources into the grid control process. Especially PV generation can offer significant benefits, e.g. the maximum power point tracking allowing fast power control without the need of additional dump loads, or the inverter technology guaranteeing continuous but rapid control of voltage and frequency. All required functionalities can be integrated in PV inverter technology but not without any drawbacks. The capability of reactive power supply does not cope with the target of providing maximum efficiency. Depending on the application, reactive power can even cause extra losses and reduce the energy yield of the plant by limiting the potential inverter efficiency. Thus a sense of proportion should be taken into account when DSOs intend to define reactive power provision as a general standard for any distribution grid, even on the low voltage level. In future, PV can contribute significantly to satisfying the worlds energy demand. Being perfectly suitable for decentralized generation, PV power can be produced close to centers of load, avoiding a relevant need to expand transmission grid capacity. On the other hand, PV is mainly generating energy during peak power demand times, and thus does not require specific expenses for storage. To steadily increase the share of renewable energies, we will have to go even further. Not until the integration of all generation technologies into production management structures can be combined with intelligent load management systems, renewable energies will be able to sustainably substitute a major share of todays conventional power plants.

[1] Erzeugungsanlagen am Mittelspannungsnetz. Richtlinie fr Anschluss und Parallelbetrieb von Erzeugungsanlagen am Mittelspannungsnetz. BDEW, June 2008 [2] Transmission Code 2007. Grid and system regulations of the German transmission grid operators. Edition 1.1, August 2007 [3] Distribution Code 2007. Regeln fr den Zugang zu Verteilungsnetzen. Edition 1.1, August 2007 [4] Netzanschlussregeln Hochund Hchstspannungsnetz. eon Netz Gmbh: Bayreuth, April 2006 [5] Netzanschluss- und Netzzugangsregeln. Technischorganisatorische Mindestanforderungen. Vattenfall Europe Transmission GmbH: Berlin, May 2008 [6] Arrt du 23 avril 2008 relatif aux prescriptions techniques de conception et de fonctionnement pour le raccordement un rseau public de distribution d'lectricit en basse tension ou en moyenne tension d'une installation de production d'nergie lectrique. France, April 2008 [7] Verordnung zu Systemdienstleistungen durch Windenergieanlagen (Systemdienstleistungsverordnung SDLWindV). Deutschland, Mai 2009 [8] Eigenerzeugungsanlagen am Mittelspannungsnetz. VDEW, 2. Ausgabe 1998 [9] Valov, Boris. ISET & Fraunhofer IWES Advancing Energy Systems. Not published [10] Quitmann, Eckard: ENERCON wind farms and its integration into power systems. 23rd European Solar Photovoltaic Energy Conference & Exhibition. Valencia, September 2008

3865