Grid Code Frequency Response Working Group System Inertia

Antony Johnson, System Technical Performance

Overview
Background to System Inertia Transmission System need Future Generation Scenarios Initial Study Work International Experience and Manufacturer Capability Transmission System Issues Conclusions

Frequency Change
Under steady state the mechanical and electrical energy must be balanced When the electrical load exceeds the mechanical energy supplied, the system frequency will fall. The rate of change of frequency fall will be dependant upon the initial Power mismatch and System inertia The speed change will continue until the mechanical power supplied to the transmission system is equal to the electrical demand.

Why is Inertia Important

Inertia is the stored rotating energy in the system Following a System loss, the higher the System Inertia (assuming no frequency response) the longer it takes to reach a new steady state operating frequency. Directly connected synchronous generators and Induction Generators will contribute directly to System Inertia. Modern Generator technologies such as Wind Turbines or wave and tidal generators which decouple the prime mover from the electrical generator will not necessarily contribute directly to System Inertia Under the NGET Gone Green Scenario, significant volumes of new generation are unlikely to contribute to System Inertia

What is inertia?
The stored energy is proportional to the speed of rotation squared 3 types of event cause a change in frequency Loss of generation (generator, importing HVDC link etc) Loss of load Normal variations in load and generator output

Loss of Generator on the system Frequency Falls as demand > generation

Stored energy delivered to grid as MW

The maths behind inertia

J2 H= MVA

H = Inertia constant in MWs / MVA J = Moment of inertia in kgm2 of the rotating mass = nominal speed of rotation in rad/s MVA = MVA rating of the machine

Typical H for a synchronous generator can range from 2 to 9 seconds (MWs/MVA)

f t

P 2H

f/t = Rate of change of frequency P = MW of load or generation lost 2H = Two times the system inertia in MWs / MVA

Strategic Reinforcements

An NGET Future Scenario

TRANSMISSION SYSTEM REINFORCEMENTS

Dounreay

Thurso

Mybster

REINFORCED NETWORK
400kV Substations 275kV Substations 400kV CIRCUITS 275kV CIRCUITS Major Generating Sites Including Pumped Storage

Stornoway

Cassley Dunbeath

Lairg Brora Shin

THE SHETLAND ISLANDS

Gone Green 2020

Plant closures
12GW Coal & oil LCPD 7.5GW nuclear Some gas & additional coal

Grudie Bridge Conon Ardmore Deanie Dunvegan Luichart

Mossford Alness Orrin Dingwall Elgin Macduff Keith Blackhillock Strichen Peterhead Fraserburgh St. Fergus

Culligran Aigas

Kilmorack Beauly Fasnakyle

Inverness

Nairn

Connected at 400kV Connected at 275kV Hydro Generation

Dyce Broadford Ceannacroc Glen Morrison Foyers Fort Augustus Invergarry Boat of Garten Tarland Quoich Craigiebuckler Kintore Woodhill Persley Willowdale Clayhills Redmoss

Under Construction or ready to start Construction subject to consents

Fiddes Fort William Rannoch

Errochty Tummel Bridge

Errochty Power Station Clunie Tealing Lunanhead Dudhope Arbroath Milton of Craigie Dudhope Bridge of Dun

Very strong need case

Cashlie Lochay Taynuilt Cruachan Nant Inveraray Sloy

Devonside Whistlefield Stirling Kincardine Dunfermline Longannet Iverkeithing Grangemouth Telford Rd. Broxburn Gorgie Bathgate Livingston Neilston Busby Whitelee Kilmarnock Town Clydes Mill Newarthill

Lyndhurst Charleston Burghmuir

Dalmally

Killin

Finlarig

Glenagnes

Strong need case

Clachan

St. Fillans SCOTTISH HYDRO-ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION Glenrothes

Cupar

Leven

Westfield
Glenniston Mossmorran

Redhouse

Port Ann Dunoon

Spango Valley Devol Moor Helensburgh Strathleven Erskine

Bonnybridge

Shrubhill Cockenzie Portobello Whitehouse Kaimes

Dunbar

Inverkip

Lambhill

Cumbernauld Easterhouse

Torness

Future requirement, but no strong need case to commence at present

Berwick

Currie

Hunterston

Hunterston Farm

Wishaw Strathaven East Kilbride South Blacklaw Linmill Galashiels

Kilwinning Saltcoats

Series Capacitors

Carradale

Meadowhead

Eccles

Ayr

Kilmarnock South Coylton

Coalburn SP TRANSMISSION LTD. Elvanfoot

Hawick

Significant new renewable

29 GW wind (2/3 offshore) Some tidal, wave, biomass & solar PV Renewable share of generation grows from 5% to 36%

Maybole

NGC Gretna
Ecclefechan

Blyth Fourstones

Auchencrosh
Newton Stewart

Dumfries

Chapelcross
Glenluce

Harker

Tongland

Stella West

Tynemouth South Shields West Boldon Offerton Hawthorne Pit Hart Moor

Spennymoor Saltholme Norton

Hartlepool Tod Point Grangetown Greystones Lackenby

Hutton

Heysham

Quernmore

Poppleton Osbaldwick Bradford West Kirkstall Thornton Skelton Grange Monk Fryston Drax Ferrybridge Eggborough Keadby Creyke Beck Saltend North Saltend South Elland Rochdale Killingholme Humber Refinery South Humber Bank

Stanah

Padiham Penwortham

Significant new non renewable build

Wylfa

3GW of new nuclear 3GW of new supercritical coal (some with CCS) 11GW of new gas

Pentir Dinorwig

Washway Templeborough Thorpe Whitegate Kearsley Farm West Marsh Kirkby South Melton Stalybridge Lister Manchester Stocksbridge Pitsmoor Rainhill Drive Aldwarke Bredbury Winco Bank Carrington Birkenhead Thurcroft Neepsend Daines Fiddlers Sheffield City Ferry Brinsworth Jordanthorpe Frodsham Capenhurst Norton Lees Macclesfield Chesterfield Deeside High Marnham Staythorpe

West Burton

Grimsby West

Cottam

Ffestiniog

Legacy

Cellarhead Bicker Fenn Willington Ratcliffe Walpole Spalding North Norwich Main

Trawsfynydd

Rugeley Ironbridge

Drakelow

Shrewsbury

Bushbury Willenhall Bustleholm Nechells Ocker Hill Hams Hall Coventry Oldbury Kitwell Berkswell Enderby

Penn

Bishops Wood

Feckenham

Grendon Eaton Socon Patford Bridge East Claydon Leighton Buzzard Sundon Wymondley Rye House Brimsdown Cowley Amersham Main Culham Didcot Iver N.Hyde Laleham Watford Elstree

Burwell Main

Sizewell

Bramford

Electricity demand remains flat (approx 60 GW)

Reductions from energy efficiency measures Increases from heat pumps & cars
Alverdiscott Exeter Pembroke Swansea North Baglan Bay Margam Pyle Cowbridge Aberthaw

Pelham Braintree Waltham Cross Hackney

Rassau Imperial Park Cilfynydd Uskmouth Whitson

Walham

Upper Boat Alpha Steel

Iron Acton Seabank

Minety

Rayleigh Main Tottenham Redbridge Warley Mill Hill Willesden Coryton Barking West Thurrock Northfleet East Ealing Singlewell Grain Tilbury City Rd W.Ham St Johns Wood New Hurst Cross Kingsnorth Kemsley Canterbury North

Tremorfa Cardiff East Melksham Bramley

West Weybridge Chessington Fleet

Rowdown Littlebrook Beddington Wimbledon

Hinkley Point Bridgwater Bolney Taunton Nursling Ninfield Dungeness Marchwood Axminster Mannington Fawley Lovedean Botley Wood E de F Sellindge

Chickerell Langage Indian Queens Landulph Abham

ISSUE B 12-02-09 41/177619

C Collins Bartholomew Ltd 1999

Quantitative Analysis
The effect of System Inertia is being quantitatively analysed through two methods:Energy Balance spread sheet approach
Utilising simple predictive output models based on an energy balance

System Study using a Test Network

Utilising Dynamic System Models

Energy Balance Spread Sheet Approach

System Considered
16.5 GW of Wind, 6.9 GW Nuclear, 1.6 GW Carbon Capture Load Response 2% per Hz Assumed loss 1800MW System Balanced at t = 0 seconds Inertia considered in isolation

General Conclusion
The higher the inertia the longer it takes for the steady state frequency to be reached. See subsequent slides

Energy Balance Spread Sheet Results Wind Generation with and Without Inertia
Variation in Inertia - Low Resolution
50.5 50 49.5 Frequency Hz 49 48.5 48 47.5 47 46.5 46 0 10 20 30 Time (s) H=0 H=3 40 50 60

Energy Balance Spread Sheet Results Wind Generation with and Without Inertia
Variation in Inertia - High Resolution
50.2 50 49.8 Frequency (Hz) 49.6 49.4 49.2 49 48.8 48.6 48.4 48.2 0 1 2 3 Time (s) H=0 H=3 4 5 6

lne_103_101_C8

Shunt 3
1

565.21 -6.98 80.11 20.64 0.94 25.69

lod_101_L1

sym_103_G3_E sym_103_G3_C sym_103_G3_A ~ ~ ~ sym_103_G3_D G sym_103_G3_B G G

Test network
101 BUS001 278.18
1.01 14.11 604.65 -239.4.. 64.29 604.65 -239.4.. 64.29

103 GEN 103 BUS003 273.26

571.72 -208.7.. 61.25

958.39 287.52

-0.00 -187.6..

0.99 17.51 -2816... 440.57 85.40

643.43 -165.8.. 66.87

643.43 -165.8.. 66.87

565.21 -6.98 80.11

1319.9.. 180.89

~ G

-568.3.. 246.64 61.25

Shunt 1

565.21 -6.98 80.11

Basic GB system representation Approx 23GW demand

lne_104_101_C6 lne_104_101_C5

trf_102_101_T1

lod_102_L2

~ G

565.21 -6.98 80.11

0.00 86.98

-1960... -35.67 64.63

trf_103_103G

lne_105_103_C4

102 BUS002 408.69

1.02 18.65 -0.00 -17.75 -1993... -175.1.. 87.43

1999.5.. 458.35 87.43 21.95 1.00 26.54

102 GEN sym_102_G2

1999.5.. 458.35 82.06

trf_102_102G 1

10 generators 5 generators providing frequency response 1320 MW load switched in (equivalent to loss of a 1320 MW generator)
104 BUS004 273.98
1.00 5.80

Shunt 2

lne_105_104_C2 lne_105_104_C1 lod_104_L4

-557.7.. 284.52 64.29

-557.7.. 284.52 64.29

-84.70 48.73 11.72

-84.70 48.73 11.72

9.58 -0.00

G ~

86.05 -78.88 11.72

86.05 -78.88 11.72

-610.1.. 214.05 66.87

105 BUS005 273.96 trf_105_105G

1275.3.. -515.5.. 69.04 -0.00 -150.8..
-0.00 0.05 1.42

1.00 7.02

1491.5.. -361.7.. 77.03

1051.6.. 286.80

trf_106_104_T3

trf_106_105_T2

lne_105_103_C3

1971.5.. 192.88 64.63

21.65 0.00

565.21 -6.98 80.11

2826.0.. -34.91 85.40

-610.1.. 214.05 66.87

-1494... -195.4.. 83.63

G ~
TEST MACH..

Shunt 4

lod_105_L5 105 GEN 21.51

0.98 14.67

1499.5.. 404.73 83.63

-1275... 572.77 69.04

-1491... 456.64 77.03

106 BUS006 405.01

1353.29 0.00

1.01 3.63

1499.5.. 404.73 77.66

-3987... -678.6.. 85.60

-3989... -182.4.. 84.52

9.71 -0.00

9380.7.. -168.3.. 92.66

21.97 1.00 11.25

106 GEN1 trf_106_106G3 trf_106_106G1

lne_106_107_C7

G ~

sym_106_G1

sym_105_G5

3999.0.. 1244.2.. 93.07

3999.0.. 1244.2.. 85.60

General Load

lod_106_L6

~ G

21.67 0.99 12.46

106 GEN3 107 BUS007 408.48

1.02 -2.88 3998.8.. 810.20 84.52 -9815... -3189... 26.53

-9380... 1241.6.. 92.66

sym_106_G3

3998.8.. 810.20 90.67

19196... 1947.8..

~ G

trf_107_107G

1 lod_107_L7

sym_107_G7

9826.2.. 3634.4.. 52.38

21.72 0.99 -0.59

107 GEN

9826.2.. 3634.4.. 26.53

~ G

DIgSILENT

lod_103_L3

Base case large disturbance normal system inertia

50.04 49.86 49.68 49.50 49.32 49.183 Hz 49.14 0.000 12.00 106 BUS006: Electrical Frequency in Hz 24.00 36.00 48.00 [s] 60.00 X = 10.400 s
DIgSILENT

3027. 2812. 2596. 2381. 2166. 1951. 0.000

12.00 24.00 FREQUENCY RESPONSE: Generation, Active Power in MW X = 10.400 s 22713 MW

36.00

48.00

[s]

60.00

2.28E+4 2.24E+4 2.21E+4 2.18E+4 2.14E+4 2.11E+4 0.000

21331.314 MW 12.00 24.00 NON FREQENCY RESPONSE: Generation, Active Power in MW 36.00 48.00 [s] 60.00

Decreasing system inertia large disturbance

( and base case inertia)
50.10 49.78 49.46 49.14 48.82 48.50 0.000 12.00 106 BUS006: Frequency (Hz) base case inertia 106 BUS006: Frequency (Hz) 0.5 x base case inertia 106 BUS006: Frequency (Hz) 0.25 x base case inertia 24.00 36.00 48.00 [s] Y = 48.800 Hz
DIgSILENT

60.00

3095. 2865. 2636. 2407. 2177. 1948. 0.000 12.00 24.00 36.00 FREQUENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators providing frequency reponse - base case inertia FREQUENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators providing frequency reponse - 0.5 x base case inertia FREQUENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators providing frequency reponse - 0.25 x base case inertia 48.00 [s] 60.00

2.28E+4 2.24E+4 2.21E+4 2.18E+4 2.14E+4 2.11E+4 0.000 12.00 24.00 36.00 NON FREQENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators NOT providing frequency reponse - base case inertia NON FREQENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators NOT providing frequency reponse - 0.5 x base case inertia NON FREQENCY RESPONSE: Total active power from generators NOT providing frequency reponse - 0.25 x base case inertia 48.00 [s] 60.00

International Experience and Manufacturer Capability

Hydro Quebec requires Generating Units in a Power Plant to have an inertia constant which is compatible with the inertia constants of existing Power Plants in the same region. The minimum inertia for wind power must equate to 3.5s. GE Wind advertise a Wind Inertia Control on their Website Enercon have completed modelling and field tests on a wind turbine and published a paper on this subject Other manufacturers are believed to be investigating an inertial capability

Transmission System Issues

Optimum Performance Capability requirements based on the minimum needs of the Transmission System. Prevention of under and over frequency incidents Control System Design and performance Filtering requirements if any (Noise Generation?) Overall Co-ordination
Inertial contribution Delivered from all plant Primary Response FSM Containment Secondary Response FSM - Correction

Conclusions
Machine inertia significantly affects the rate and rise and rate of fall of System Frequency It is likely to be cheaper (although some form of quantitative analysis would be required) to require all generators to contribute to System Inertia rather than having no requirement and requiring larger volumes of fast acting frequency response? Non Discrimination The inertial delivery requirements needs to be quantified
Delivery / Capability Control System Settings / Filtering