CSS Research Forum

Event Type: 
Yashen Lin and Kiran Chawla
Friday, March 13, 2015 - 2:00pm to 3:00pm
1028 Dana Building
Event Sponsor: 
Center for Sustainable Systems

Join us for our next CSS Research Forum event.  We'll hear two presentations from Yashen Lin and Kiran Chawla on their recent work.

Date: Friday, March 13
Time: 2:00 - 3:00
Room: Dana 1028

Environmental impacts of using energy storage for power system operating reserves
Yashen Lin, post-doctoral fellow

As more renewable energy sources are integrated into the power system, additional operating reserves are required to ensure the functionality and reliability of the system. Energy storage devices (ES), such as batteries, are promising alternatives to conventional generators for providing such reserves because, in general, these resources are more responsive than conventional power plants. With low or no direct emissions during operation, having ES in power systems is often assumed to reduce pollutant emission to the environment. However, due to the complex nature of power systems and their operational strategies, the use of ES may lead to negative outcomes under certain grid mixes. The role that ES reserves plays in affecting the system environmental outcomes has not been thoroughly studied.  In this project, we provide an assessment of these impacts in cases with various system configurations. The optimal power flow (OPF) problem is solved to obtain the dispatch result, which is used for evaluating CO2 emission. The analysis presented here provides insights on the important factors that determine the environmental impacts of adding ES reserves, which is useful for power system operators and policy makers.

Weighing impacts of power generation beyond climate change
Kiran Chawla, Master's student

This project uses a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) approach to carry out an evaluation of the various generation technologies that could be potentially used for fulfilling the growing needs of the power sector. Generation from coal, natural gas, nuclear energy, hydro-power, solar energy (photovoltaics as well as concentrating solar power), wind, geothermal energy and biomass is compared. The objectives considered are -- minimization of system costs, water footprint, carbon dioxide equivalent emissions, and land intensity of the chosen energy technology. An Attributional Life-Cycle Analysis approach is used to determine the overall water, carbon dioxide equivalent and land footprint of the chosen alternatives, along with the ‘Levelized Cost of Energy’ and ‘Levelized Avoided Cost of Energy’ as metrics for cost. Conventional generation as well as renewable energy technologies are compared and contrasted using different objective scoring schemes to test for the impact of MCDA scoring methodology on results. Different weighting alternatives for determining the relative importance of the four objective functions are also considered. The results are consistent under the two scoring schemes employed, showing that the results are robust to different objective methods of evaluation under an MCDA framework. The weights, on the other hand, being a subjective measure that could be used to reflect stakeholder preferences, or resource constraints of a particular region in question, give different optimal solutions under different combinations.

Whether you are brand new to CSS or a veteran, you are strongly encouraged to come join us and hear about the work other researchers are doing. 

We will serve a selection of PIES and COFFEE.

Admin Content
CSS participant: