Skip to main content

Building and Evaluating GENCO Bidding Strategies and Unit Commitment Schedules with Genetic Algorithms

  • Chapter
The Next Generation of Electric Power Unit Commitment Models

Abstract

Far from being an artifact of the past, the unit commitment (UC) algorithm is essential to making economical decisions in today’s competitive electricity industry. Increasing competition; decreasing obligations-to-serve; and enhanced futures, forwards, and spot market trading in electricity and other related markets make the decision of which units to operate more complex than ever before. Decentralized auction markets currently being implemented in countries like Spain use UC-type models, which should encourage researchers to continue working on finding better and faster solution techniques. UC schedules may be developed for a generation company, a system operator, etc. The need for many flavors of UC algorithms, each considering different inputs and objective functions, is growing. Factors such as historical reliability of units should be considered in designing the UC algorithm. Although a particular schedule may result in the lowest cost, or highest profit, it may depend on generators that have varying availabilities. Traditionally, consumers had very reliable electricity whether they needed it or not. Given a choice in a market-based electricity system, many consumers might choose to pay for a slightly lower level of power availability if it would result in sufficient savings. As the number of inputs and options grows in UC problems, the genetic algorithm (GA) becomes an important tool for searching the large solution space. GA times-to-solution often scale up linearly with the number of units, or hours being considered. Another benefit of using the GA to generate UC schedules is that an entire population of schedules is developed, some of which may be well suited to situations that may arise quickly due to unexpected contingencies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. J. Kumar and G. Shebté. “Framework for Energy Brokerage System with Reserve Margin and Transmission Losses.” In Proc. 1996 IEEE/PES Winter Meeting, 96 WM 190-9 PWRS, NY: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  2. C. Richter and G. Sheblé. “Genetic Algorithm Evolution of Utility Bidding Strategies for the Competitive Marketplace.” In Proc. 1997 IEEE/PES Summer Meeting, PE-752-PWRS-1-05-1997. New York: IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  3. G. Sheblé. “Electric energy in a fully evolved marketplace.” Paper presented at the 1994 North American Power Symposium, Kansas State University, KS, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  4. G. Sheblé. “Priced based operation in an auction market structure.” Paper presented at the 1996 IEEE/PES Winter Meeting. Baltimore, MD, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  5. C. Richter. Profiting from Competition: Financial Tools for Competitive Electric Generation Companies. Ph.D. dissertation, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  6. G. Sheblé and G. Fahd. Unit commitment literature synopsis. IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 9(1): 128–135, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  7. A. Wood and B. Wollenberg. Power Generation, Operation, and Control. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  8. G. Sheblé. Unit Commitment for Operations. Ph.D. Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  9. S. Takriti, B. Krasenbrink, and L.S.-Y. Wu. “Incorporating Fuel Constraints and Electricity Spot Prices into the Stochastic Unit Commitment Problem,” IBM Research Report: RC 21066, Mathematical Sciences Department, T.J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  10. C. Richter and G. Sheblé. “A Price-Based Unit Commitment GA for Uncertain Price and Demand Forecasts.” In Proc. 1998 North American Power Symposium, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  11. S. Kondragunta. Genetic algorithm unit commitment program, M.S. Thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  12. S. A. Kazarlis, A. G. Bakirtzis, and V. Petridis. “A Genetic Algorithm Solution to the Unit Commitment Problem.” In Proc. 1995 IEEE/PES Winter Meeting 152-9 PWRS, New York: IEEE, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  13. T. Maifeld and G. Sheblé. Genetic-based unit commitment. IEEE Trans. Power Syst., 11(3): 1359, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. C. Richter, D. Ashlock, and G. Sheblé. “Effects of Tree Size and State Number on GP-Automata Bidding Strategies.” In Proc. 1998 Conference on Genetic Programming, Denver, CO: Morgan Kaufmann, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Koza. Genetic Programming. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  16. J. Koza. Genetic Programming II. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  17. D. Ashlock. “GP-automata for Dividing the Dollar.” Mathematics Department, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. Ashlock and C. Richter. “The Effects of Splitting Populations on Bidding Strategies.” In Proc. 1997 Conference on Genetic Programming, Denver, CO: Morgan Kaufmann, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  19. M. Andrews and R. Prager. “Genetic programming for the acquisition of double auction market strategies.” In Advances in Genetic Programming, K. Kinnear Jr., ed. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Richter, C.W., Sheblé, G.B. (2002). Building and Evaluating GENCO Bidding Strategies and Unit Commitment Schedules with Genetic Algorithms. In: Hobbs, B.F., Rothkopf, M.H., O’Neill, R.P., Chao, Hp. (eds) The Next Generation of Electric Power Unit Commitment Models. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 36. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47663-0_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47663-0_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-7334-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-306-47663-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics