Power grid annual investment evaluation method

Abstract

The invention discloses a power grid annual investment evaluation method. The method comprises the following steps: S10, determining an investment caliber; s20, constructing an investment evaluation system and screening indexes, wherein the investment evaluation system is a full-voltage-class investment evaluation system, and the full-voltage-class investment evaluation system comprises a 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, a 110 (35) kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem and a 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem; s30, determining an index scoring method and determining an index weight; and S40, collecting related index historical data of the evaluation subsystem of each region, carrying out comprehensive scoring in combination with the step S30, establishing an investment early warning model based on the comprehensive score of the investment evaluation system, and judging the annual power grid investment condition of the region or county company. According to the systematic and scientific evaluation system and method, the reasonability of the investment direction is evaluated through power grid technical indexes, the benefit condition brought by the project is judged from the two aspects of economic benefits and social benefits, and comprehensive investment evaluation analysis is conducted on power grid construction through combination of the two aspects.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of power grid investment, and in particular to an annual power grid investment evaluation method for county (district) companies. Background Art

[0002] In the power industry, grid construction is an important link in realizing power transmission and distribution, and is the top priority of grid infrastructure investment. However, there is currently a lack of a comprehensive, objective, and scientific evaluation system and method for investment in grid construction to effectively evaluate the effectiveness of existing grid construction and investment benefits. In the existing evaluation system, a single financial benefit indicator is usually used as the main basis for evaluating grid investment projects. It is impossible to consider multiple factors at the same time, making it difficult to comprehensively and accurately evaluate the investment benefits of grid projects. Summary of the invention

[0003] In view of the above technical problems in the related art, the present invention provides a method for annual investment evaluation of a power grid, which can solve the above problems.

[0004] To achieve the above technical objectives, the technical solution of the present invention is implemented as follows:

[0005] A method for evaluating annual power grid investment comprises the following steps:

[0006] S10. Determine the investment scope;

[0007] S20, constructing an investment evaluation system and selecting indicators: the investment evaluation system is a full voltage level investment evaluation system, and the full voltage level investment evaluation system includes a 220 kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, a 110 (35) kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem and a 10 kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem;

[0008] S30. Determine the indicator scoring method and indicator weights;

[0009] S40, collect historical data of relevant indicators of each district evaluation subsystem, combine step S30 to make a comprehensive score, establish an investment early warning model based on the comprehensive score of the investment evaluation system, and judge the annual power grid investment situation of the district or county company.

[0010] Furthermore, the 220 kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, the 110 (35) kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem and the 10 kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem in step S20 all include an evaluation of investment direction and an evaluation of investment benefits.

[0011] Furthermore, the 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, the 110(35)kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem and the 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem all adopt a three-tiered hierarchical structure, including primary indicators, secondary indicators and tertiary indicators; wherein the primary indicators of the 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem include investment direction and investment benefits, the secondary indicators include comprehensive power grid indicators, power supply capacity, utilization efficiency, grid structure, equipment level and distribution automation, economic benefits and social benefits, and the tertiary indicators include power supply reliability, comprehensive line loss rate, comprehensive voltage qualification rate, "N-1" pass rate, line heavy load rate, line light load rate, distribution transformer heavy load rate, distribution transformer light load rate, connection rate, proportion of lines with more than 20 years of operation, proportion of switchgear with more than 20 years of operation, cable rate, overhead line insulation rate, distribution automation coverage rate, proportion of three-remote terminals, power grid technical indicators and the improvement / decrease of each technical indicator in the past three years, financial internal rate of return, financial net present value, unit investment increase in power supply, unit investment increase in load and carbon emission reduction; the first-level indicators of the 110 (35) kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem include investment direction and investment benefits, and the second-level indicators include investment direction and investment benefits, ... The indicators include power supply capacity, utilization efficiency, equipment level, financial benefits and social benefits. The third-level indicators include capacity ratio, main transformer "N-1" pass rate, line "N-1" pass rate, main transformer heavy load rate, line heavy load rate, main transformer light load rate, line light load rate, main transformer operating period of more than 25 years, line operating period of more than 25 years, main transformer light load rate, power grid technical indicators and the improvement / decrease of various technical indicators in the past three years, financial internal rate of return, financial net present value, unit investment increase in power supply, unit investment increase in load and carbon emission reduction; the 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem is mentioned The first-level indicators include investment direction and investment benefits; the second-level indicators include power supply capacity, utilization efficiency, equipment level, financial benefits and social benefits; the third-level indicators include capacity load ratio, main transformer "N-1" pass rate, line "N-1" pass rate, main transformer heavy load rate, line heavy load rate, main transformer light load rate, line light load rate, proportion of main transformers with an operating period of more than 25 years, proportion of lines with an operating period of more than 25 years, main transformer light load rate, power grid technical indicators and the improvement / decrease of various technical indicators in the past three years, financial internal rate of return, financial net present value, unit investment increase in power supply, unit investment increase in load and carbon emission reduction.

[0012] Furthermore, the third-level indicators adopt a scoring method based on indicator gaps, and quantify the scores according to the actual status of the evaluation indicators between the benchmark value and the target value. The benchmark value corresponds to a score of 0, and the target value corresponds to a score of 100.

[0013] Furthermore, the scoring method based on indicator gap includes an upward indicator gap scoring method and a downward indicator gap scoring method, wherein the calculation formula for the upward indicator gap scoring method is as follows:

[0014]

[0015] The calculation formula for the decreasing indicator gap score is as follows:

[0016]

[0017] In the formula, m is the target value of the indicator, j is the benchmark value of the indicator, and x is the current value of the indicator.

[0018] Furthermore, the target value of the indicator and the benchmark value of the indicator are set using quartile or benchmark analysis methods.

[0019] Furthermore, in step S30, the Delphi method is used to assign weights to indicators at all levels in the evaluation subsystem.

[0020] Furthermore, in step S40, based on the comprehensive score of the investment evaluation system, a two-axis four-quadrant method is used to perform a horizontal comparison of each evaluation area, wherein the horizontal axis is the investment benefit, the vertical axis is the investment direction, and the red dotted line is the average value of the investment direction and the investment benefit.

[0021] Beneficial effects of the present invention:

[0022] (1) This application proposes a systematic and scientific evaluation system and method, which evaluates the rationality of investment direction through power grid technical indicators, and evaluates the benefits of the project from two perspectives: economic benefit and social benefit. The combination of the two makes a comprehensive investment evaluation analysis for power grid construction;

[0023] (2) This application arranges the evaluation objects in the order of the overall goal, sub-goals of each layer, and evaluation indicators, and divides them into different levels to establish a ladder hierarchy structure. The weight of each element of each layer to the element of the previous layer is obtained, and finally the weight of each layer indicator to the overall goal is recursively derived by weighted summation. A clear hierarchical structure is the key to the hierarchical analysis method to decompose and simplify complex problems. The attribute weights determined on this basis reflect the importance of indicators at the same level.

[0024] (3) Based on the indicator gap scoring method, the benchmark value and target value can be reasonably set to effectively widen the gap between the same indicator in each evaluation area, avoiding the situation where the scores of the same indicator in each evaluation area are too concentrated and the gap cannot be reflected;

[0025] (4) The indicator weight method based on the Delphi method is to obtain the opinions of experts on the issues to be predicted, sort them out, summarize them, and count them, and then anonymously feedback them to the experts, and then solicit their opinions again, concentrate them again, and feedback them again until a consensus is reached, making the indicator weight more accurate. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0026] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings required for use in the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying creative work.

[0027] The present invention is further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0028] Figure 1 is a flow chart of a method for annual investment evaluation of a power grid described in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0029] Figure 2 is a schematic diagram of a full voltage level investment evaluation system described in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0030] Figure 3 is a schematic diagram of the ascending indicator gap scoring in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0031] Figure 4 is a schematic diagram of the scoring of the decreasing indicator gap described in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0032] Figure 5 is a flow chart of the indicator weight assignment method described in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0033] Figure 6 is a schematic diagram of a color warning model described in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0034] Figure 7 It is a weight assignment chart of indicators at various levels of the 110(35)kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem described in the embodiment of the present invention;

[0035] Figure 8 It is a weight assignment chart of indicators at various levels of the 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem described in the embodiment of the present invention;

[0036] Fig. 9 It is a weight assignment chart of indicators at various levels of the 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem described in the embodiment of the present invention;

[0037] Fig.10 is a scoring chart of the 110(35)kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem described in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0038] Fig.11 is a scoring chart of the 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem described in an embodiment of the present invention;

[0039] Fig.12 It is a scoring chart of the 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem described in the embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0040] The following will be combined with the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present invention to clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field belong to the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0041] like Figure 1-12 As shown, according to the present invention, a method for annual investment evaluation of a power grid is disclosed, comprising the following steps:

[0042] Determine investment scope:

[0043] Grid investments include infrastructure, overhaul and technical transformation, etc. The investment scope of this annual grid investment evaluation method for county (district) companies is only for infrastructure investment.

[0044] Construction of investment evaluation system:

[0045] (1) Full voltage level investment evaluation system

[0046] like Figure 2 As shown in FIG. 1 , the full voltage level investment evaluation system includes three subsystems, namely, the 220 kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, the 110 (35) kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem and the 10 kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, where 110 (35) kV represents the voltage level of 110 kV or 35 kV.

[0047] Each evaluation subsystem includes two aspects: investment direction and investment benefit. It reflects whether the investment direction is correct by evaluating the annual power grid technical indicators and the improvement of the power grid technical indicators in the past three years. The economic and social benefits reflect whether the investment benefits are good.

[0048] (2) Investment evaluation system scoring method

[0049] The scoring method based on the gap between indicators is adopted. The actual value of the evaluation indicator is quantitatively scored according to the position between the benchmark value and the target value. The benchmark value corresponds to a score of 0 and the target value corresponds to a score of 100. For rising indicators, the score below the benchmark value is 0, and the score above the target value is 100. The middle part is linearly distributed. The schematic diagram of the scoring of the gap between rising indicators is shown in the figure below. Figure 3 As shown in the figure, the scoring formula for the rising indicator gap is:

[0050]

[0051] In the formula, m is the target value of the indicator, j is the benchmark value of the indicator, and x is the current value of the indicator.

[0052] For the declining indicators, the value above the benchmark is scored as 0, the value below the target is scored as 100, and the middle part is linearly distributed. The schematic diagram of the declining indicator gap score is as follows Figure 4 As shown, the scoring formula for the decreasing indicator gap is:

[0053]

[0054] In the formula, m is the target value of the indicator, j is the benchmark value of the indicator, and x is the current value of the indicator.

[0055] The quartile method and benchmark analysis method can be used in the process of parameter selection of indicator target values ​​and indicator benchmark values.

[0056] Quartile: Also known as quartile point, it refers to the values ​​at three dividing points in statistics when all values ​​are arranged from small to large and divided into four equal parts. It is often used in box plots in statistics. Quartile is a set of data that is sorted and divided into four parts by three points. The values ​​are at 25%, 50% and 75%, and each part contains 25% of the data. When calculating quartiles based on ungrouped data, first sort the data, then determine the position of the quartile, and the value at that position is the quartile.

[0057] Benchmark analysis: It can be used to compare companies within the same industry as well as companies outside the industry, and to find out one's own shortcomings and others' advantages through comparison. Therefore, benchmark analysis is also called benchmark analysis.

[0058] Method for determining the weights of evaluation system indicators:

[0059] like Figure 5 As shown in the figure, the Delphi method was used to assign weights to indicators at all levels under the indicator system. Eight experts were selected and the final indicator system weight results were obtained after multiple feedback and confirmation by experts.

[0060] Investment evaluation subsystem:

[0061] The investment evaluation subsystems all adopt a three-tiered hierarchical structure, dividing the entire indicator system into three levels, namely, primary indicators, secondary indicators, and tertiary indicators.

[0062] The 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem is as follows: Figure 8 As shown:

[0063] The first-level indicators include: investment direction and investment benefits;

[0064] Secondary indicators include: comprehensive indicators of power grid, power supply capacity, utilization efficiency, grid structure, equipment level and distribution automation, economic benefits and social benefits;

[0065] The third-level indicators include: power supply reliability rate, comprehensive line loss rate, comprehensive voltage qualification rate, "N-1" pass rate, line heavy load rate, line light load rate, distribution transformer heavy load rate, distribution transformer light load rate, connection rate, proportion of lines with an operation period of more than 20 years, proportion of switchgear with an operation period of more than 20 years, cable rate, overhead line insulation rate, distribution automation coverage rate, proportion of three-remote terminals and other power grid technical indicators and the improvement (decline) of various technical indicators in the past three years, financial internal rate of return, financial net present value, increased power supply per unit investment, increased load per unit investment and carbon emission reduction, totaling 31 third-level indicators.

[0066] Its 26 power grid technical indicators reflect whether the investment direction of 10kV power grid is correct, and its 5 benefit indicators reflect whether the investment benefit of 10kV power grid is good.

[0067] The 110(35)kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem is as follows: Figure 7 As shown:

[0068] The first-level indicators include: investment direction and investment benefits;

[0069] Secondary indicators include: power supply capacity, utilization efficiency, equipment level, financial benefits and social benefits;

[0070] The third-level indicators include: capacity load ratio, main transformer "N-1" pass rate, line "N-1" pass rate, main transformer heavy load rate, line heavy load rate, main transformer light load rate, line light load rate, proportion of main transformers with an operating period of more than 25 years, proportion of lines with an operating period of more than 25 years, main transformer light load rate and other power grid technical indicators and the improvement (decline) of various technical indicators in the past three years, financial internal rate of return, financial net present value, increased power supply per unit investment, increased load per unit investment and carbon emission reduction, totaling 18 third-level indicators.

[0071] Its 13 power grid technical indicators reflect whether the investment direction of 110(35)kV power grid is correct, and its 5 benefit indicators reflect whether the investment benefit of 110(35)kV power grid is good.

[0072] The 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem is shown in Table 9:

[0073] The first-level indicators include: investment direction and investment benefits;

[0074] Secondary indicators include: power supply capacity, utilization efficiency, equipment level, financial benefits and social benefits;

[0075] The third-level indicators include: capacity load ratio, main transformer "N-1" pass rate, line "N-1" pass rate, main transformer heavy load rate, line heavy load rate, main transformer light load rate, line light load rate, proportion of main transformers with an operating period of more than 25 years, proportion of lines with an operating period of more than 25 years, main transformer light load rate and other power grid technical indicators and the improvement (decline) of various technical indicators in the past three years, financial internal rate of return, financial net present value, increased power supply per unit investment, increased load per unit investment and carbon emission reduction, totaling 18 third-level indicators.

[0076] Its 13 power grid technical indicators reflect whether the investment direction of 220kV power grid is correct, and its 5 benefit indicators reflect whether the investment benefit of 220kV power grid is good.

[0077] Color warning:

[0078] Grid investment cannot be determined unilaterally. The scale needs to take into account both investment direction and investment benefits. Based on the comprehensive score of the investment evaluation system, the two-axis four-quadrant method is used to focus on the horizontal comparison of each evaluation area. The horizontal axis is investment benefits, the vertical axis is investment direction, and the red dotted line is the average of investment direction and investment benefits. Figure 6 As shown, an investment early warning model is established to evaluate the annual power grid investment of district (county) companies.

[0079] Green: The investment direction is correct and the investment returns are good.

[0080] Yellow: The investment direction is wrong but the investment returns are good; the investment direction is right but the investment returns are poor, which requires attention.

[0081] Red: The investment direction is wrong and the investment efficiency is poor, which requires special attention.

[0082] Example:

[0083] An investment evaluation analysis is conducted on District A of a certain city, which is mainly a Class A and A+ power supply area.

[0084] (1) Determine the scope of evaluation and investment scope

[0085] The evaluation scope is the results of the investment in 220kV and below in Area A in the past three years. The investment scope is the infrastructure investment in the past three years.

[0086] (2) 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem

[0087] ① According to the three-level indicators in the 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, collect the actual values ​​of the three-level indicators of 10kV in area A;

[0088] ② Use the benchmark analysis method to compare with other cities in the industry, determine the baseline and target values ​​of each indicator, and score each third-level indicator;

[0089] ③ The Delphi method is used to assign weights to indicators at all levels under the evaluation subsystem, and the weight ratio of indicators at all levels is obtained. Combined with the scores of indicators at all levels, the final score of the 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem in Area A is obtained;

[0090] ④The final score of the 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem in Area A is as follows: Fig.11 As shown;

[0091] ⑤ Applying the color warning model, the final investment direction score of the 10kV power grid investment evaluation system in Area A is 90, the investment benefit score is 77, and the comprehensive score is 85. The evaluation result is that the investment direction is good, but the investment benefit is poor. It is a yellow warning and needs attention.

[0092] (3) 110kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem

[0093] ① According to the three-level indicators in the 110kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, the actual values ​​of the three-level indicators of 110kV in Area A are collected;

[0094] ② Use the benchmark analysis method to compare with other cities in the industry, determine the baseline and target values ​​of each indicator, and score each third-level indicator;

[0095] ③ The Delphi method is used to assign weights to indicators at all levels under the evaluation subsystem, and the weight ratio of indicators at all levels is obtained. Combined with the scores of indicators at all levels, the final score of the 110kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem in Area A is obtained;

[0096] ④The final score of the 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem in Area A is as follows: Fig.10 As shown;

[0097] ⑤ Applying the color warning model, the final investment direction score of the 110kV power grid investment evaluation system in Area A was 89, the investment benefit score was 77, and the comprehensive score was 84. The evaluation result was that the investment direction was good, but the investment benefit was poor. It was a yellow warning and needed attention.

[0098] (4) 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem

[0099] ① According to the three-level indicators in the 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, the actual values ​​of the three-level indicators of 220kV in Area A are collected;

[0100] ② Use the benchmark analysis method to compare with other cities in the industry, determine the baseline and target values ​​of each indicator, and score each third-level indicator;

[0101] ③ The Delphi method is used to assign weights to indicators at all levels under the evaluation subsystem, and the weight ratio of indicators at all levels is obtained. Combined with the scores of indicators at all levels, the final score of the 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem in Area A is obtained;

[0102] ④The final score of the 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem in Area A is as follows: Fig.12 As shown;

[0103] ⑤ Applying the color warning model, the final investment direction score of the 220kV power grid investment evaluation system in Area A was 92, the investment benefit score was 100, and the comprehensive score was 95. The evaluation results showed that the investment direction was good, the investment benefit was good, and it was a green benefit model.

[0104] Depend on Figures 10-12 It is not difficult to see that the tertiary indicators are first scored using a scoring method based on indicator gaps, and then the secondary indicator scores are calculated using the tertiary indicator scores and tertiary indicator weights. The primary indicator scores are then calculated using the secondary indicator scores and secondary indicator weights. Finally, the comprehensive score is calculated using the primary indicator scores and primary indicator weights.

[0105] The above description is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention and is not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc. made within the spirit and principle of the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating annual power grid investment, characterized in that: The steps include: S10. Determine the investment scope; S20, constructing an investment evaluation system and selecting indicators: the investment evaluation system is a full voltage level investment evaluation system, and the full voltage level investment evaluation system includes a 220 kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, a 110 (35) kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem and a 10 kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem; S30. Determine the indicator scoring method and indicator weights; S40, collect historical data of relevant indicators of each district evaluation subsystem, combine step S30 to make a comprehensive score, establish an investment early warning model based on the comprehensive score of the investment evaluation system, and judge the annual power grid investment situation of the district or county company.

2. A method for annual investment evaluation of a power grid according to claim 1, characterized in that: The 220 kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, the 110 (35) kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem and the 10 kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem in step S20 all include evaluation of investment direction and evaluation of investment benefits.

3. A method for annual investment evaluation of a power grid according to claim 2, characterized in that: The 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem, the 110(35)kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem and the 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem all adopt a three-tiered hierarchical structure, including primary indicators, secondary indicators and tertiary indicators; wherein the primary indicators of the 10kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem include investment direction and investment benefits, the secondary indicators include comprehensive power grid indicators, power supply capacity, utilization efficiency, grid structure, equipment level and distribution automation, economic benefits and social benefits, and the tertiary indicators include power supply reliability, comprehensive line loss rate, comprehensive voltage qualification rate, "N-1 "Pass rate, line heavy load rate, line light load rate, distribution transformer heavy load rate, distribution transformer light load rate, connection rate, line operation period of more than 20 years, switch equipment operation period of more than 20 years, cable rate, overhead line insulation rate, distribution automation coverage rate, three-remote terminal ratio, power grid technical indicators and the improvement / decrease of each technical indicator in the past three years, financial internal rate of return, financial net present value, unit investment increase in power supply, unit investment increase in load and carbon emission reduction; the first-level indicators of the 110 (35) kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem include investment direction and investment benefits, and the second-level indicators include investment direction and investment benefits, investment benefits, and investment benefits. Including power supply capacity, utilization efficiency, equipment level, financial benefits and social benefits. The three-level indicators include capacity load ratio, main transformer "N-1" pass rate, line "N-1" pass rate, main transformer heavy load rate, line heavy load rate, main transformer light load rate, line light load rate, main transformer operating period of more than 25 years, line operating period of more than 25 years, main transformer light load rate, power grid technical indicators and the improvement / decrease of various technical indicators in the past three years, financial internal rate of return, financial net present value, unit investment increase in power supply, unit investment increase in load and carbon emission reduction; among them, the 220kV power grid investment evaluation subsystem The first-level indicators include investment direction and investment benefits; the second-level indicators include power supply capacity, utilization efficiency, equipment level, financial benefits and social benefits; the third-level indicators include capacity load ratio, main transformer "N-1" pass rate, line "N-1" pass rate, main transformer heavy load rate, line heavy load rate, main transformer light load rate, line light load rate, proportion of main transformers with an operating period of more than 25 years, proportion of lines with an operating period of more than 25 years, main transformer light load rate, power grid technical indicators and the improvement / decrease of various technical indicators in the past three years, financial internal rate of return, financial net present value, unit investment increase in power supply, unit investment increase in load and carbon emission reduction.

4. A method for annual investment evaluation of a power grid according to claim 3, characterized in that: The three-level indicators adopt a scoring method based on indicator gaps, and quantitative scoring is performed according to the position of the actual status quo of the evaluation indicator between the benchmark value and the target value. The benchmark value corresponds to a score of 0 and the target value corresponds to a score of 100.

5. A method for annual investment evaluation of a power grid according to claim 4, characterized in that: The scoring method based on indicator gap includes the upward indicator gap scoring and the downward indicator gap scoring. The calculation formula of the upward indicator gap scoring is as follows: The calculation formula for the decreasing indicator gap score is as follows: In the formula, m is the target value of the indicator, j is the benchmark value of the indicator, and x is the current value of the indicator.

6. A method for annual investment evaluation of a power grid according to claim 5, characterized in that: The target value of the indicator and the benchmark value of the indicator are set using the quartile or benchmark analysis method.

7. A method for annual investment evaluation of a power grid according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S30, the Delphi method is used to assign weights to indicators at all levels under the evaluation subsystem.

8. A method for annual investment evaluation of a power grid according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S40, based on the comprehensive score of the investment evaluation system, a two-axis four-quadrant method is used to perform a horizontal comparison of the evaluation areas, wherein the horizontal axis is the investment benefit, the vertical axis is the investment direction, and the red dotted line is the average value of the investment direction and the investment benefit.

Images