AC Network-Constrained Peer-to-Peer Electricity Market Model in Low-voltage Power Distribution Networks
Yang, Jiajia, Wang, Kun, Luo, Fengji, and Wen, Fushuan (2023) AC Network-Constrained Peer-to-Peer Electricity Market Model in Low-voltage Power Distribution Networks. International Journal of Electrical Power and Energy Systems, 154. 109428.
PDF (Published Version)
- Published Version
Restricted to Repository staff only |
Abstract
The rapid growth of Distributed Energy Resources (DERs) and demand response in modern power grids calls for decentralized electricity trading mechanisms to effectively induce and coordinate responses from massive DERs and load entities. This paper proposes a fully decentralized peer-to-peer (P2P) distribution electricity trading mechanism backboned by a modified version of Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM). Comparing with the state-of-the-art P2P electricity markets, the proposed electricity trading mechanism comprehensively incorporates power network constraints formulated by an alternating current power flow model. In the proposed method, nodal voltages are designed as the only public variables shared among participants. Privacy of each participant is thus sufficiently preserved without exposing the bid data to the others. Meanwhile, the proposed P2P method can also ensure the global optimality of social welfare in electricity transactions. Comprehensive case studies are carried out using the IEEE 33-node distribution system to demonstrate the feasibility and efficiency of proposed P2P electricity trading mechanism. The results indicate that the proposed model can efficiently integrates network constraints in the market clearing process while maintaining computational performance, ensuring stable convergence regardless of distribution system congestion. The proposed P2P electricity market can achieve global maximization of social welfare, with a relative difference of no more than 5.0% compared to the conventional centralized market. Even in worst-case scenarios, the relative difference remains within 7.32%. Meanwhile, the method accurately accounts for network losses, guaranteeing the feasibility of trading plans within the physical network.