ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014

1 Solution

The Lagrangian, neglecting generation limits, is:

F = C1 (P1 ) + C2 (P2 ) + C3 (P3 ) + λ(1000 − P1 − P2 − P3 ) (1.1)

Applying KKT conditions:

∂F dC1
=0⇒ = 0.005P1 + 3.2 (1.2)
∂P1 dP1
∂F dC2
=0⇒ = 0.0066P2 + 5.1 (1.3)
∂P2 dP2
∂F dC3
=0⇒ = 0.006P3 + 4.2 (1.4)
∂P3 dP3
∂F
= 0 ⇒ 1000 − P1 − P2 − P3 = 0 (1.5)
∂λ

and the incremental cost of generation for each unit in this case is equal to the system marginal
cost, i.e.:
dC1 dC2 dC3
= = =λ (1.6)
dP1 dP2 dP3
Solving (1.2) to (1.6) yields: P1 = 561.41 MW, P2 = 137.43 MW, and P3 = 301.16 MW.
As P1 and P3 are violating maximum limits, they are fixed at P1 = 500 MWand P3 = 300 MW,
which yields P2 = 200 MW.
Thus, the incremental costs are:

dC1 dC2 dC3

= 5.7 $/MWh, = 6.42 $/MWh, and = 6 $/MWh (1.7)
dP1 dP2 dP3

where system marginial cost λ = 6.42 $/MWh, as P2 is not violating any limits. The incremental
costs of P1 and P3 satisfy the conditions of optimality as they both are less than λ while violating
their maximum limits.

1
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
2 Solution

The Lagrangian, neglecting generation limits, is:

F = C1 (P1 ) + C2 (P2 ) + C3 (P3 ) + λ(1145 − P1 − P2 − P3 ) (2.1)

Applying KKT conditions:

∂F dC1
=0⇒ = 5.092P1 + 23.45 (2.2)
∂P1 dP1
∂F dC2
=0⇒ = 37.08P2 + 78.43 (2.3)
∂P2 dP2
∂F dC3
=0⇒ = 10.708P3 + 54.34 (2.4)
∂P3 dP3
∂F
= 0 ⇒ 1145 − P1 − P2 − P3 = 0 (2.5)
∂λ

and the incremental cost of generation for each unit in this case is equal to the system marginal
cost, i.e.:
dC1 dC2 dC3
= = =λ (2.6)
dP1 dP2 dP3
Solving (2.2) to (2.6) yields: P1 = 712.56 MW, P2 = 96.37 MW, and P3 = 336.07 MW.
As P1 and P2 are violating their maximum and minimum limits, respectively, they are fixed at
P1 = 700 MWand P2 = 100 MW, which yields P3 = 345 MW.
Thus, the incremental costs are:

dC1 dC2 dC3

= 3587.85 $/MWh, = 3786.43 $/MWh, and = 3748.61 $/MWh (2.7)
dP1 dP2 dP3

where system marginial cost λ = 3748.61 $/MWh, as P3 is not violating any limits. The incre-
mental costs of P1 and P2 satisfy the conditions of optimality as:

dC1 dC2
< λ (as P1 violates maximum limit) and > λ (as P2 violates minimum limit)
dP1 dP2

2
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
3 Solution

The Lagrangian, neglecting generation limits and system losses, is:

F = C1 (P1 ) + C2 (P2 ) + λ(1200 − P1 − P2 ) (3.1)

Applying KKT conditions:

∂F dC1
=0⇒ = 0.00506P1 + 3.19 (3.2)
∂P1 dP1
∂F dC2
=0⇒ = 0.0065P2 + 5.11 (3.3)
∂P2 dP2
∂F
= 0 ⇒ 1200 − P1 − P2 = 0 (3.4)
∂λ

and the incremental cost of generation for each unit in this case is equal to the system marginal
cost, i.e.:
dC1 dC2 dC3
= = =λ (3.5)
dP1 dP2 dP3
Solving (3.2) to (3.5) yields: P1 = 840.83 MW, and P2 = 359.17 MW. As P1 is violating the
maximum limit, it is fixed at P1 = 600 MW, which yields P2 = 600 MW and λ = 9.01 $/MWh.
The Lagrangian considering losses is given by:

F = C1 (P1 ) + C2 (P2 ) + λ(1200 + PLoss − P1 − P2 ) (3.6)

where
PLoss = 11 × 10−5 P21 + 6 × 10−5 P22 (3.7)

Thus the incremental loss factors and penalty factors (pf ) for the two units are:

∂PLoss ∂PLoss
= 0.00022P1 and = 0.00012P1 (3.8)
∂P1 ∂P2
1 1
pf1 = and pf2 = (3.9)
1 − 0.00022P1 1 − 0.00012P2

3
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
The KKT conditions for the Lagrangian in (3.6) are derived as follows:

∂F
= 0 ⇒ 0.00506P1 + 3.19 + λ(0.00022P1 − 1) = 0 (3.10)
∂P1
∂F
= 0 ⇒ 0.0065P2 + 5.11 + λ(0.00012P2 − 1) = 0 (3.11)
∂P2
∂F
= 0 ⇒ 1200 + (0.00011P21 + 0.00006P22 ) − P1 − P2 = 0 (3.12)
∂λ

Thus, the coordination equations can be written by re-arranging the above KKT conditions:
!
1
(0.00506P1 + 3.19) = λ (3.13)
1 − 0.00022P1
!
1
(0.0065P2 + 5.11) = λ (3.14)
1 − 0.00012P2
1200 + (0.00011P21 + 0.00006P22 ) − P1 − P2 = 0 (3.15)

Using (3.9), (3.13) and (3.14) are re-written as:

pf1 (0.00506P1 + 3.19) = λ

(3.16)
pf2 (0.0065P2 + 5.11) = λ


(3.17)

In order to solve the above set of equations we use the iteration method and start from the initial
ELD solution, neglecting losses, i.e., P1 = 600 MW, P2 = 600 MW and λ = 9.01 $/MWh. An
error is defined as:
 = [PD + PLoss ] − [P1 + P2 ] (3.18)

and the objective is to minimize this  below a certain value (say 0.15).
The iteration is shown in the following table.

4
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
Iteration P1 P2 PLoss PD + PLoss λ P1 P2 
pf 1 pf 2
count MW MW MW MW $/MWh MW MW MW
1 600 600 61.2 1.152074 1.077586 1261.2 9.01 915 500.19 -153.99
8.5 827.67 427.38 6.15
2 827.67 427.38 86.31 1.222625 1.054058 1286.31 8.5 743.53 454.47 88.31
8.75 783.94 490.96 11.41
3 783.94 490.96 82.06 1.208411 1.062604 1282.06 8.75 800.58 480.69 0.79
4 800.58 480.69 84.37 1.213780 1.061214 1284.37 8.75 794.25 482.35 7.77
8.8 802.39 489.6 -7.62
8.775 798.32 485.97 0.08
5 798.32 485.97 84.28 1.213048 1.061928 1284.28 8.775 799.18 485.12 -0.02
6 799.18 485.12 84.38 1.213327 1.061813 1284.38 8.775 798.85 485.26 0.27

Thus, the ELD solution, neglecting the generation limits, is P1 = 798.85 MW, P2 = 485.26 MW
and λ = 8.775 $/MWh.
If the generation limits are considered, then P1 = 600 MW, and using (3.15) P2 = 666.23 MW.
The system marginal cost, i.e., the second generator’s incremental cost, is λ = 9.441 $/MWh,
and the first generator’s incremental cost is 6.226 $/MWh (satisfying the condition of optimality).

5
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
4 Solution

The Lagrangian is given by:

F = C1 (P1 ) + C2 (P2 ) + λ(PD + PLoss − P1 − P2 ) (4.1)

where λ = 30 $/MWh and PD is the unknown demand. The loss function PLoss is given as:

PLoss = 0.00011P21 + 0.00006P22 + 0.0045P1 P2 (4.2)

Thus the incremental loss factors are:

∂PLoss ∂PLoss
= 0.00022P1 + 0.0045P2 and = 0.00012P1 + 0.0045P1 (4.3)
∂P1 ∂P2

The KKT conditions for the Lagrangian in (4.1) are derived as follows:

∂F ∂PLoss
!
dC1
=0⇒ +λ −1 =0 (4.4)
∂P1 dP1 ∂P1
⇒ 0.00643P1 + 3.37 + 30 (0.00022P1 + 0.0045P2 − 1) = 0 (4.5)
⇒ 0.01303P1 + 0.135P2 = 26.63 (4.6)
∂F ∂PLoss
!
dC2
=0⇒ +λ −1 =0 (4.7)
∂P2 dP2 ∂P2
⇒ 0.00364P1 + 7.19 + 30 (0.00012P2 + 0.0045P1 − 1) = 0 (4.8)
⇒ 0.135P1 + 0.00724P2 = 22.81 (4.9)
∂F  
= 0 ⇒ PD + 0.00011P21 + 0.00006P22 + 0.0045P1 P2 − P1 − P2 = 0 (4.10)
∂λ

Solving (4.6) and (4.9) gives P1 = 159.21 MW and P2 = 181.89 MW as the optimal dispatches.

6
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
5 Solution

If the generating units are operating on economic dispatch, the incremental cost of all the three
generators must be equal to the Lagrange multiplier λ. A relation for the increment in total cost
∆Ct in terms of the generator incremental cost functions can be written as:

dC1 dC2 dC3

∆Ct = · ∆P1 + · ∆P2 + · ∆P3 (5.1)
dP1 dP2 dP3
= λ (∆P1 + ∆P2 + ∆P3 ) (5.2)

as
dC1 dC2 dC3
= = =λ (5.3)
dP1 dP2 dP3
The first set of reading gives:

0 = λ × (1 + 1 − 2) = λ × 0 = 0 (5.4)

which does not provide any information on λ. The second set of reading shows:

30 = λ × (1 + 1 + 1) = 3λ (5.5)
⇒ λ = 10 $/MWh (5.6)

But from the third set of reading, we have:

20 = λ × (−3 + 1 + 1) (5.7)
⇒ λ = 20 $/MWh (5.8)

Therefore, we can conclude that the system is NOT on economic dispatch and Jill was right.

7
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
6 Solution

The Lagrangian is given by:

F = E1 (P1 ) + E2 (P2 ) + λ(900 − P1 − P2 ) (6.1)

where the significance of λ is that, it denotes the increase in emission (in Kg) for a 1 MW increase
in demand. For economic emission load dispatch we derive the following equations using KKT
conditions:

∂F dE1
=0⇒ −λ=0 (6.2)
∂P1 dP1
⇒ 0.055P1 + 3.5 = λ (6.3)
∂F dE2
=0⇒ −λ (6.4)
∂P2 dP2
⇒ 0.13P2 + 6.2 = λ (6.5)
∂F
= 0 ⇒ 900 − P1 − P2 = 0 (6.6)
∂λ

Solving (6.3), (6.5), and (6.6) gives P1 = 647.03 MW and P2 = 252.97 MW as the optimal dis-
patches, and the incremental emission λ = 39.09 Kg/MWh, i.e., the emission will increase by
39.09 Kg/h for an increase of 1 MW in generation.
A comparison of the total system emissions in case of joint dispatch with that when the utilities
operate independently will provide the amount of emission reduction, as shown below:

Economic emission load dispatch Independent operation

P1 647.03 MW 575 MW
P2 252.97 MW 325 MW
Emission from utility - 1 13,802.42 kg/h 11,129.69 kg/h
Emission from utility - 2 5,776.01 kg/h 8,928.63 kg/h
Total emission 19,578.43 kg/h 20,058.32 kg/h
Emission reduction in joint dispatch 479.89 kg/h

8
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
7 Solution

a) The optimization problem is as follows;

jmax
X
Min. J= n j C(PS j ) (7.1)
j=1

subject to the constraints:

PH j + PS j = PD j (7.2)
jmax
X
n j q j = QT OT (7.3)
j=1

Thus, the Lagrangian function is given by:

jmax jmax
j 
X X   max
X 
F= n j C(PS j ) + λ j P D j − P H j − PS j + γ  n j q j − QT OT  (7.4)
j=1 j=1 j=1

Applying KKT conditions:

∂F dC(PS j )
= 0 ⇒ nj = λj (7.5)
∂PS j dPS j
∂F ∂q(PH j )
= 0 ⇒ γ · nj = λj (7.6)
∂PH j ∂PH j
∂F
= 0 ⇒ PD j − PH j − PS j = 0 (7.7)
∂λ j
jmax
∂F X
=0⇒ n j q j − QT OT = 0 (7.8)
∂γ j=1

where (7.5) and (7.6) are the coordination equations.

9
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
b) Substituting values:

4 × 0.0054PS 1 + 9 − λ1 = 0


(7.9)
4 × 0.0054PS 2 + 9 − λ2 = 0


(7.10)
−λ1 + 4 × γ (5.64) = 0 (7.11)
−λ2 + 4 × γ (5.64) = 0 (7.12)
725 − PH1 − PS 1 = 0 (7.13)
615 − PH2 − PS 2 = 0 (7.14)
4 × (5.64PH1 + 180) + 4 × (5.64PH2 + 180) − 25000 = 0 (7.15)

Starting iteration:

Iteration γ λ1 PS 1 PH1 λ2 PS 2 PH2 QT OT 

count $/acre-ft $/MWh MW MW $/MWh MW MW acre-ft acre-ft
1 2 45.12 422.22 302.78 45.12 422.22 192.78 12619.83 -12380.16
2 1.75 39.48 161.11 563.89 39.48 161.11 453.89 24401.12 -598.88
3 1.73 39.0288 140.22 584.78 39.0288 140.22 474.78 25343.67 343.67
4 1.74 39.2544 150.67 574.33 39.2544 150.67 464.33 24872.17 -127.83

The final solution is as follows:

Hour γ ($/acre-ft) λ ($/MWh) PS (MW) PH (MW) Hydro-discharge (acre-ft)

1-4 574.33 13676.88
1.74 39.2544 150.67
5-8 464.33 11195.28

10
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
8 Solution

a) Total energy demand = E D = 150 MW × 168 h = 25,200 MWh.

Total hydro energy available = E H = 20,000 MWh.
Total thermal energy required from steam generator = ET H = 5,200 MWh.
To minimize the system cost, the thermal generator should operate at:
r
81
P∗T H = = 54.77 MW (8.1)
0.027

and the thermal generator should operate for:

ET H 5200
T T∗ H = ∗ = = 94.94 h (8.2)
PT H 54.77

b) The hydro generator is delivering 150 – 54.77 = 95.23 MW for 94.94 h and 150 MW for
168 – 94.94 = 73.06 h. Thus, the total volume of water discharged from the reservoir is computed
as:

QT ot = qH (PH = 95.23) × 94.94 + qH (PH = 150) × 73.06 acre-ft (8.3)

= (250 + 20 · 95.23) × 94.94 + (250 + 20 · 150) × 73.06 = 442, 002.72 acre-ft (8.4)

c) Let T S be the required amount of time that the thermal generator must operate, then the
hydro generator is operating for T S hours at 95.23 MW and 168 – T S hours at 150 MW. Thus
the total water discharge can be written as:

QT ot = T S × (250 + 20 · 95.23) + (168 − T S ) × (250 + 20 · 150) = 375, 000acre-ft (8.5)

⇒ TS = 156.11 h (8.6)

d) The amount of hydro energy generated is:

E H = 156.11 × 95.23 + (168 − 156.11) × 150 = 16,649.86 MWh (8.7)

11
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
9 Solution

a) Total energy demand = E D = 200 MW × 168 h = 33,600 MWh.

Total hydro energy available = E H = 28,000 MWh.
Total thermal energy required from steam generator = ET H = 5,600 MWh.
To minimize the system cost, the thermal generator should operate at:
r
100
P∗T H = = 50 MW (9.1)
0.04

and the thermal generator should operate for:

ET H 5600
T T∗ H = = = 112 h (9.2)
P∗T H 50

b) The hydro generator is delivering 200 – 50 = 150 MW for 112 h and 200 MW for 168 –
112 = 56 h. Thus, the total volume of water discharged from the reservoir is computed as:

QT ot = qH (PH = 150) × 112 + qH (PH = 200) × 56 acre-ft (9.3)

= (300 + 25 · 150) × 112 + (300 + 25 · 200) × 56 = 750, 400 acre-ft (9.4)

c) The new water draw-down is: QT ot = 0.95 · 750, 400 = 712,880 acre-ft. Let T S be
the required amount of time that the thermal generator must operate, then the hydro generator is
operating for T S hours at 150 MW and 168 – T S hours at 200 MW. Thus the total water discharge
can be written as:

QT ot = T S × (300 + 25 · 150) + (168 − T S ) × (300 + 25 · 200) = 712, 880 acre-ft (9.5)

⇒ TS = 142.02 h (9.6)

12
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
10 Solution

a) Operating cost of Utility – A: CA = 0.09 × 4002 + 15 × 400 + 5 = 20,405 $/h

Operating cost of Utility–B: CB = 0.06 × 2502 + 6.5 × 250 + 2 = 5,377 $/h
System marginal cost for–A: λA = dC A
dPA
= 0.18PA + 15 = 87 $/MWh
System marginal cost for–B: λB = dC B
dPB
= 0.12PB + 6.5 = 36.5 $/MWh
b) Coordinated operation: Total demand is now:

PA + PB = 650MW (10.1)

For optimal dispatch:

dC A dC B
= =λ (10.2)
dPA dPB
Solving, we get PA = 231.67 MW, and PB = 418.33 MW.
Operating cost of Utility–A: CA = 0.09 × 231.672 + 15 × 231.67 + 5 = 8,310.44 $/h
Operating cost of Utility–B: CB = 0.06 × 418.332 + 6.5 × 418.33 + 2 = 13,221.14 $/h
Therefore, total system operating cost is: CA+B = CA + CB = 21,531.58 $/h
System marginal cost is: λ= dC A
dPA
= 0.18PA + 15 = dC B
dPB
= 0.12PB + 6.5 = 56.7 $/MWh
c) Optimal transaction is from B to A: PT = PB − PDB = 418.33 – 250 = 168.33 MW.
System savings = independent operation cost – cordinated dispatch cost = (20,405 + 5,377) –
21,531.58 = 4,250.42 $/h.
Using split-the-savings principle, Utility A pays to B: Increased cost of B + 12 ×the savings =
(13,221.14 – 5,377) + 12 ×4,250.42 = 9,969.35 $/h
d) Since transmission capacity is 100 MW, Utility–B can only supply 100 MW to Utility–A.
Therefore, Utility–A’s demand is now PDA = 400 – 100 = 300 MW, and Utility–B’s PDB = 250
+ 100 = 350 MW.
Thus, optimal dispatch is: PA = 300 MW, and PB = 350 MW.

13
ECE 666 Assignment 1 Solution Winter 2014
The system cost = CA+B = C A + C B = (0.09 × 3002 + 15 × 300 + 5) + (0.06 × 3502 + 6.5 × 350 +
2) = 22,232 $/h.
System savings = (20,405 + 5,377) – 22,232 = 3,550 $/h.
Marginal cost of Utility–A: λ A = 0.18 × 300 + 15 = 69 $/h.
Marginal cost of Utility–B: λ B = 0.12 × 350 + 6.5 = 48.5 $/h.
Using split-the-savings principle, Utility A pays to B: Increased cost of B + 12 ×the savings =
(9,627 – 5,377) + 12 ×3,550 = 6,025 $/h

14