Bidding strategy of generation companies in a competitive electricity market using the shuffled frog leaping algorithm

In a competitive electricity market, generation companies need suitable bidding models to maximize their profit. Therefore, each supplier will bid strategically for choosing the bidding coefficients to counter the competitors' bidding strategies. In this paper, the optimal bidding strategy problem is solved using a novel algorithm based on the shuffled frog leaping algorithm (SFLA). It is a memetic metaheuristic that is designed to seek a global optimal solution by performing a heuristic search. It combines the benefits of the genetic-based memetic algorithm (MA) and the social behavior-based particle swarm optimization (PSO). This allows it to have a more precise search that avoids the premature convergence and selection of the operators. Therefore, the proposed method overcomes the short comings of the selection of operators and premature convergence of the genetic algorithm (GA) and PSO method. The most important merit of the proposed method is its high convergence speed. The proposed method is numerically verified through computer simulations on an IEEE 30-bus system consisting of 6 suppliers and a practical 75-bus Indian system consisting of 15 suppliers. The results show that the SFLA takes less computational time and produces higher profits compared to PSO and the GA.

Bidding strategy of generation companies in a competitive electricity market using the shuffled frog leaping algorithm

In a competitive electricity market, generation companies need suitable bidding models to maximize their profit. Therefore, each supplier will bid strategically for choosing the bidding coefficients to counter the competitors' bidding strategies. In this paper, the optimal bidding strategy problem is solved using a novel algorithm based on the shuffled frog leaping algorithm (SFLA). It is a memetic metaheuristic that is designed to seek a global optimal solution by performing a heuristic search. It combines the benefits of the genetic-based memetic algorithm (MA) and the social behavior-based particle swarm optimization (PSO). This allows it to have a more precise search that avoids the premature convergence and selection of the operators. Therefore, the proposed method overcomes the short comings of the selection of operators and premature convergence of the genetic algorithm (GA) and PSO method. The most important merit of the proposed method is its high convergence speed. The proposed method is numerically verified through computer simulations on an IEEE 30-bus system consisting of 6 suppliers and a practical 75-bus Indian system consisting of 15 suppliers. The results show that the SFLA takes less computational time and produces higher profits compared to PSO and the GA.

___

  • G. Gross, D. Finlay, “Generation supply bidding in perfectly competitive electricity markets”, Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, Vol. 6, pp. 83–98, 2000.
  • A.K. David, “Competitive bidding in electricity supply”, IEE Proceedings C - Generation, Transmission and Distribution, Vol. 140, pp. 421–426, 1993.
  • G. Gross, D.J. Finlay, “Generation supply bidding in perfectly competitive electricity markets”, Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Vol. 6, pp. 83–98, 2000.
  • J. Wang, Z. Zhou, A. Botterud, “An evolutionary game approach to analyzing bidding strategies in electricity markets with elastic demand”, Energy, Vol. 36, pp. 3459–3467, 2011.
  • E. Hasan, D. Francisco, Galiana, “Fast computation of pure strategy Nash equilibria in electricity markets cleared by merit order”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 25, pp. 722–728, 2010.
  • A.K. David, F. Wen, “Strategic bidding for electricity supply in a day-ahead energy market”, Electric Power Systems Research, Vol. 59, pp. 197–206, 2001.
  • A.K. David, F. Wen, “Optimally co-ordinate bidding strategies in energy and ancillary service markets”, IEE Proceedings - Generation, Transmission & Distribution, Vol. 149, pp. 331–338, 2002.
  • A. Ugedo, E. Lobato, A. Franco, L. Rouco, J. Fern´ andez-Caro, J. Chofre, “Strategic bidding in sequential electricity markets”, IEE Proceedings - Generation, Transmission & Distribution, Vol. 153, pp. 431–442, 2006. S.E. Fleten, E. Pettersen, “Constructing bidding curves for a price-taking retailer in the Norwegian electricity market”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 20, pp. 701–708, 2005.
  • A.K. David, F.S. Wen, “Optimal bidding strategies and modeling of imperfect information among competitive generators”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 16, pp. 15–21, 2001.
  • B.F. Hobbs, C.B. Metzler, J.S. Pang, “Strategy gaming analysis for electric power systems: an MPEC approach”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 15, pp. 638–645, 2000.
  • A. Baillo, M. Ventosa, M. Rivier, A. Ramos, “Optimal offering strategies for generation companies operating in electricity spot markets”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 19, pp. 745–753, 2004.
  • S. Torre, J.M. Arroyo, A.J. Conejo, J. Contreras, “Price maker self-scheduling in a pool-based electricity market: a mixed-integer LP approach”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 17, pp. 1037–1042, 2002.
  • M.V. Pereira, S. Granville, M. Fampa, R. Dix, L.A. Barroso, “Strategic bidding under uncertainty: a binary expansion approach”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 20, pp. 180–188, 2005.
  • A. Azadeh, S.F. Ghaderi, B. Pourvalikhan Nokhanandan, M. Shaikhalishahi, “A new GA approach for optimal bidding strategy viewpoint of profit maximization of a generation company”, Expert Systems with Applications, 20 A.K. Jain, S.C. Srivastava, “Strategic bidding and risk assessment using genetic algorithm in electricity markets”, International Journal of Emerging Electric Power Systems, Vol. 10, pp. 1–10, 2009.
  • A.D. Yucekaya, J. Valenzuela, G. Dozier, “Strategic bidding in electricity markets using particle swarm organization”, Electric Power Systems Research, Vol. 79, pp. 335–345, 2009.
  • P. Kanakasabhapathy, K. Shanti Swarup, “Bidding strategy for of pumped-storage plant in pool-based electricity market”, Energy Conversion and Management, Vol. 51, pp. 572–579, 2010.
  • S. Soleymani, “Bidding strategies of generation companies using PSO combined with SA method in the pay as bid market”, Electrical Power and Energy Systems. Vol. 33, pp. 1272–1278, 2011.
  • F. Valdez, P. Melin, O. Castillo, “An improved evolutionary method with fuzzy logic for combining particle swarm optimization and genetic algorithms”, Applied Soft Computing, Vol. 11, pp. 2625–2632, 2011.
  • F. Wen, A.K. David, “Optimal bidding strategies for competitive generators and large consumers”, Electric Power Systems Research, Vol. 23, pp. 7–43, 2001.
  • M.M. Eusuff, K.E. Lansey, F. Pasha, “Shuffled frog-leaping algorithm: a memetic meta-heuristic for discrete optimization”, Engineering Optimization, Vol. 38, pp. 129–154, 2006.
  • E. Elbeltagi, T. Hegazy, D. Grierson, “Comparison among five evolutionary-based optimization algorithms”, Advanced Engineering Informatics, Vol. 19, pp. 43–53, 2005.
  • T.H. Huynth, “A modified shuffled frog leaping algorithm for optimal tuning of multivariable PID controllers”, IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology, pp. 1–6, 2008.
  • I.J. Raglend, N.P. Padhy, “Solutions to practical unit commitment problems with operational power flow and environmental constraints”, IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, pp. 1–6, 2006.
Turkish Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science-Cover
  • ISSN: 1300-0632
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 6 Sayı
  • Yayıncı: TÜBİTAK