Advertisement

Water Resources Management

, Volume 33, Issue 1, pp 173–188 | Cite as

An Optimal Operation Model for Hydropower Stations Considering Inflow Forecasts with Different Lead-Times

  • Xiaoli Zhang
  • Yong PengEmail author
  • Wei Xu
  • Bende Wang
Article
  • 45 Downloads

Abstract

To make full use of inflow forecasts with different lead times, a new reservoir operation model that considers the long-, medium- and short-term inflow forecasts (LMS-BSDP) for the real-time operation of hydropower stations is presented in this paper. First, a hybrid model, including a multiple linear regression model and the Xinanjiang model, is developed to obtain the 10-day inflow forecasts, and ANN models with the circulation indexes as inputs are developed to obtain the seasonal inflow forecasts. Then, the 10-day inflow forecast is divided into two segments, the first 5 days and the second 5 days, and the seasonal inflow forecast is deemed as the long-term forecast. Next, the three inflow forecasts are coupled using the Bayesian theory to develop LMS-BSDP model and the operation policies are obtained. Finally, the decision processes for the first 5 days and the entire 10 days are made according to their operation policies and the three inflow forecasts, respectively. The newly developed model is tested with the Huanren hydropower station located in China and compared with three other stochastic dynamic programming models. The simulation results demonstrate that LMS-BSDP performs best with higher power generation due to its employment of the long-term runoff forecast. The novelties of the present study lies in that it develops a new reservoir operation model that can use the long-, medium- and short-term inflow forecasts, which is a further study about the combined use of the inflow forecasts with different lead times based on the existed achievements.

Keywords

Hydropower station Different lead-times Inflow forecasts LMS-BSDP model 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant No. 2017YFC0406005), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 91547111, 51609025, 51709108), Scientific Research Foundation for High-level Talents of North China University of Water Resources and Electric Power (Grant No. 201702013), the National Natural Science Foundation of Chongqing (Grant No. cstc2015jcyjA90015), Open Fund Approval (Grant No. SKHL1427), and Scientific Research Foundation of Chongqing Jiaotong University (Grant No. 15JDKJC-B019).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

None.

Supplementary material

11269_2018_2095_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (128 kb)
Fig. S1 (PDF 128 kb)
11269_2018_2095_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (108 kb)
Fig. S2 (PDF 107 kb)

References

  1. Eum H, Kim Y, Palmer RN (2011) Optimal drought management using sampling stochastic dynamic programming with a hedging rule. J Water Resour Plan Manag 137(1):113–122.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000095 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Hamlet AF, Huppert D, Lettenmaier DP (2002) Economic value of long-lead streamflow forecasts for Columbia River hydropower. J Water Resour Plan Manag 128(2):91–101.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2001)128:2(91) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Karamouz M, Vasiliadis HV (1992) Bayesian stochastic optimization of reservoir operation using uncertain forecasts. Water Resour Res 28(5):1221–1232.  https://doi.org/10.1029/92WR00103 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kim YO, Palmer RN (1997) Value of seasonal flow forecasts in Bayesian stochastic programming. J Water Resour Plan Manag 123(6):327–335.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(1997)123:6(327) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Li X, Guo S, Liu P, Chen G (2010) Dynamic control of flood limited water level for reservoir operation by considering inflow uncertainty. J Hydrol 391(1–2):124–132.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.07.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Maurer EP, Lettenmaier DP (2004) Potential effects of long-lead hydrologic predictability on Missouri River main-stem reservoirs. J Clim 17(1):174–186.  https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(2004)017<0174:PEOLHP>2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. McCollor D, Stull R (2008) Hydrometeorological short-range ensemble forecasts in complex terrain. Part i: meteorological evaluation. Weather Forecast 23(4):533–556.  https://doi.org/10.1175/2008WAF2007063.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Mujumdar PP, Nirmala B (2007) A bayesian stochastic optimization model for a multi-reservoir hydropower system. Water Resour Manag 21(9):1465–1485.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-006-9094-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Sudheer KP, Gosain AK, Ramasastri KS (2002) A data-driven algorithm for constructing artificial neural network rainfall-runoff models. Hydrol Process 16(6):1325–1330.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.554 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Tang G, Zhou H, Li N (2010a) Reservoir optimization model incorporating inflow forecasts with various lead times as hydrologic state variables. J Hydroinf 12(3):292–302.  https://doi.org/10.2166/hydro.2009.088 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Tang G, Zhou H, Li N, Wang F, Wang Y, Jian D (2010b) Value of medium-range precipitation forecasts in inflow prediction and hydropower optimization. Water Resour Manag 24(11):2721–2742.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-010-9576-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Tejada-Guibert JA, Johnson SA, Stedinger JR (1995) The value of hydrologic information in stochastic dynamic programming models of a multireservoir system. Water Resour Res 31(10):2571–2579.  https://doi.org/10.1029/95WR02172 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Xu W, Peng Y, Wang B (2013) Evaluation of optimization operation models for cascaded hydropower reservoirs to utilize medium range forecasting inflow. SCIENCE CHINA Technol Sci 56(10):2540–2552.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-013-5346-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Xu W, Zhang C, Peng Y, Fu G, Zhou H (2014) A two stage Bayesian stochastic optimization model for cascaded hydropower systems considering varying uncertainty of flow forecasts. Water Resour Res 50(12):9267–9286.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR015181 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Yao H, Georgakakos A (2001) Assessment of Folsom Lake response to historical and potential future climate scenarios: 2. Reservoir management. J Hydrol 249(1–4):176–196.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00418-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Zhao R (1992) The Xinanjiang model applied in China. J Hydrol 135(1):371–381Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Water ConservancyNorth China University of Water Resources and Electric PowerZhengzhouChina
  2. 2.School of Hydraulic EngineeringDalian University of TechnologyDalianChina
  3. 3.College of River and Ocean EngineeringChongqing Jiaotong UniversityChongqingChina
  4. 4.State Key Laboratory of Hydraulics and MountainRiver Engineering, Sichuan UniversityChengduChina

Personalised recommendations