A Power System Source-Load-Storage Planning and Operation Method Based on VCG Low-Carbon Demand Response

Abstract

This invention proposes a power system source-load-storage planning and operation method based on VCG (Vehicle Dynamics Group) low-carbon demand response. Under carbon emission constraints, it considers the synergy between flexible source-load-storage planning and operation, and evaluates their contribution based on an improved VCG mechanism. Historical annual load data is clustered using the K-means method, and five typical daily loads are used to represent the annual load. A planning model is determined based on the planning parameters of carbon capture units and energy storage. Based on the operating parameters of thermal power units, carbon capture units, energy storage, and load, and with given carbon price information, different carbon emission constraints and operating constraints are determined. A joint solution model for power system planning and operation is then established, and the daily contribution of different participants is evaluated based on the VCG mechanism.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of low-carbon economic dispatch and planning technology of power systems, and particularly relates to a power system source-load-storage planning and operation method based on VCG low-carbon demand response. Background Technology

[0002] With increasing global energy demand, the consumption of fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions are leading to rising energy costs and global warming. Reducing carbon dioxide emissions from coal-based industries and coal-fired power generation is crucial for current carbon reduction efforts. Adopting flexible source-load-storage technologies to respond to low-carbon demand can promote large-scale emission reduction and provide strong support for achieving the "dual carbon" goal. On the other hand, the VCG mechanism is a universal mechanism for achieving optimal solutions. It satisfies the properties of incentive compatibility, individual rationality, and system cost minimization, guiding market participants to report accurate information and ensuring fair allocation of payments to each participant, thereby improving market efficiency. Based on the above, the power system source-load-storage planning and operation method based on VCG low-carbon demand response proposed in this invention mainly considers the following two aspects: first, it considers the construction of carbon capture units and the configuration of energy storage capacity to achieve optimal resource allocation; second, it considers source-load-storage response scheduling to improve the flexibility of the power system, comprehensively studying the joint optimization of planning and operation to achieve a low-carbon transformation of the power system while reducing total costs. Summary of the Invention

[0003] Objective: To address the aforementioned technical problems, this invention provides a power system source-load-storage planning and operation method based on VCG (Vehicle Dynamics Group) low-carbon demand response. This invention considers low-carbon demand response, studies the synergy between flexible source-load-storage planning and scheduling, and investigates the daily contribution rate of different participants based on the VCG mechanism. Through joint optimization of flexible source-load-storage planning and scheduling, this invention achieves optimal resource allocation and low-carbon transformation of the power system. Furthermore, it can assess the contribution based on the VCG mechanism, ensuring cost recovery for all participants and improving the flexibility and economy of the power system.

[0004] Technical Solution: To address the aforementioned technical problems, this invention proposes a power system source-load-storage planning and operation method based on VCG, which includes the following steps:

[0005] Step 1: Obtain the power system planning parameters, including carbon capture unit and energy storage information;

[0006] Step 2: Obtain the operating parameters of the power system, including thermal power units, carbon capture units, lines, flexible loads, and carbon price information;

[0007] Step 3: Based on the power system planning parameters, obtain the planning model for the construction of carbon capture units and the configuration of energy storage capacity;

[0008] Step 4: Based on the power system operating parameters and the output of thermal power units and carbon capture units, obtain the source-load-storage operation model;

[0009] Step 5: Based on the planning model and operation model in Step 3, establish a joint solution model for power system planning and operation, and consider power balance constraints, line power constraints, thermal power unit constraints, and corresponding constraints of source-load-storage. Use the CPLEX solver to solve the model and obtain the daily planning and operation results of power system source-load-storage under different carbon prices, so as to achieve optimal resource allocation.

[0010] Step 6: Fix the daily planning schemes of power system source-load-storage under different carbon prices obtained from the solution, and evaluate the daily contribution of different energy storage and load aggregators based on the VCG mechanism according to the daily operation results.

[0011] Furthermore, in step 3, based on the power system planning parameters, the planning model for the construction of carbon capture units and the configuration of energy storage capacity is as follows:

[0012]

[0013] In the formula, C Inv To plan the total cost, C Inv,ESS For energy storage capacity configuration costs, C Inv,CCS The cost of carbon capture unit construction is given by subscripts e and g, which represent energy storage and carbon capture units, respectively. Ω ESS and Ω CCS These are energy storage units and carbon capture unit units, respectively, where l is the conversion rate, n is the service life of the energy storage, and λ is the energy storage unit. Ope This is the ratio of energy storage operation and maintenance costs to planning costs. To plan the unit cost of the rated power of energy storage e, The rated power configured for energy storage e To plan the unit cost of the rated capacity of energy storage e, The rated capacity configured for energy storage e The maximum capacity configured for energy storage e To plan the construction cost of carbon capture unit g, x g Let x be an integer variable representing whether carbon capture unit g has been constructed. g A value of 1 indicates the construction of the unit, x g A value of 0 indicates that the unit will not be built.

[0014] Furthermore, in step 4, the operational model for calculating the source, load, and storage is as follows:

[0015]

[0016] In the formula, C Ope For the total operating cost, C Ope,G C Ope,CCSC Ope,ESS and C Carbon These represent the operating costs of thermal power units, carbon capture units, energy storage, and carbon emission costs, respectively. N Day Ω represents the number of days in the target year of planning, where the subscripts t, y, and v represent the scheduling time, different typical scenarios in the planning year, and thermal power units, respectively. T Ω Y and Ω G These are the sets of scheduling times, the set of typical mid-year planning scenarios, and the set of thermal power units, respectively. y Let C2, C1, and C0 represent the probabilities of different typical scenarios, respectively, and let C2, C1, and C0 be the operating cost coefficients of thermal power unit v and carbon capture unit g, respectively. ESS This refers to the charging and discharging cost coefficient for energy storage. The startup cost of thermal power unit v. This represents the startup status of thermal power unit v at time t in scenario y, where 1 indicates that thermal power unit v has started at time t, and 0 indicates that thermal power unit v has not started at time t. tax represents the carbon price. Let v be the carbon emission intensity of the thermal power unit at time t. and Let v be the active power generated by thermal power unit v and carbon capture unit g at time t, respectively, in scenario y. and Let be the charging and discharging power of energy storage e at time t in scenario y, respectively. Let g be the net CO2 emissions of carbon capture unit g at time t in scenario y.

[0017] Furthermore, in step 5, the power system planning-operation joint solution model and its corresponding constraints are as follows:

[0018] 1) Objective function

[0019] min Cost = C Inv +C Ope (A-5)

[0020] In the formula, Cost is the total system cost;

[0021] 2) Power balance and line power constraints

[0022]

[0023]

[0024] In the formula, the subscripts i, j, ij, and d represent nodes, branches, and loads, respectively, and Ω N , F(i,:), Ω B and Ω L These are the node set, the node set starting with node i, the branch set, and the load set, respectively. This represents the active power required by load d at time t in scenario y after participating in demand response. B represents the net output power of carbon capture unit g at time t in scenario y. ij θ represents the susceptance of branch ij. i,t,y and θ j,t,y Let be the phase angles of nodes i and j at time t in scenario y, respectively. The maximum capacity of branch ij;

[0025] 3) Constraints of thermal power units

[0026]

[0027]

[0028]

[0029]

[0030]

[0031]

[0032] In the formula, T represents the number of faces in the time period. and Let v be the maximum and minimum active power output of the thermal power unit at time t, respectively. For the maximum ramping power of thermal power unit v, z v,t,y and Both are integer variables, representing the operating state and shutdown action of the thermal power unit v at time t in scenario y, respectively. v,t,y A value of 1 indicates that the thermal power unit v is in operation at time t, and 0 indicates that the thermal power unit v is in shutdown at time t. A value of 1 indicates that the thermal power unit v has a shutdown action at time t, while 0 indicates that the thermal power unit v has no shutdown action at time t. and These are the minimum start-up and shutdown times for thermal power unit v, respectively.

[0033] 4) Source-load-storage constraints

[0034]

[0035]

[0036]

[0037]

[0038]

[0039]

[0040]

[0041]

[0042]

[0043]

[0044]

[0045]

[0046]

[0047]

[0048]

[0049]

[0050]

[0051]

[0052]

[0053]

[0054]

[0055] In the formula, Let G be the base energy consumption of the carbon capture unit g, which does not change with the carbon capture status, and be set as a constant. Let g be the carbon capture operation energy consumption coefficient of carbon capture unit g. Let μ be the carbon emission intensity of the carbon capture unit g. g The CO2 capture rate of the carbon capture unit is between 80% and 95%. These represent the solution storage capacities of the carbon capture unit g at time t in scenario y, specifically the lean and rich liquid tanks. These are the maximum liquid storage capacities of the lean and rich liquid tanks of the carbon capture unit, respectively. These represent the initial solution storage capacities of the lean and rich liquid tanks of the carbon capture unit, respectively. These represent the maximum and minimum net output of the carbon capture unit g at time t, respectively. and These represent the maximum and minimum net CO2 emissions emitted by the carbon capture unit g at time t, respectively. This represents the maximum ramping power of the carbon capture unit g. and Let α represent the required active power and the active power available for demand response at time t for load d in scenario y, respectively. SL The load d is the adjustable coefficient. and Both are integer variables, representing the charging and discharging states of energy storage e at time t in scenario y. Let e ​​be the energy storage capacity of energy storage at time t in scenario y. and η represents the minimum and initial capacities of energy storage e, respectively. Ch and η Dis These are the charging and discharging efficiencies, respectively. This represents the maximum number of charge / discharge cycles per day for energy storage e.

[0056] Furthermore, in step 6, based on the operational results, the calculation steps for evaluating the daily contribution of different energy storage and load aggregators using VCG are as follows:

[0057]

[0058]

[0059]

[0060]

[0061]

[0062] In the formula, Cost2 and Cost 3,J and Cost 4,K Let r represent the daily operating cost considering all source-load-storage response, the daily operating cost considering the source-load-storage response excluding energy storage J, and the daily operating cost considering the source-load-storage response excluding load aggregator K, respectively. J and r K These represent the daily contributions of energy storage J and load aggregator K, respectively.

[0063] Beneficial effects: Compared with the prior art, the technical solution of the present invention has the following beneficial technical effects:

[0064] (1) This invention takes into account low-carbon demand response, studies the synergy of flexible source-load-storage planning and scheduling, and evaluates the daily contribution of different participants based on the VCG mechanism. This invention can not only achieve optimal resource allocation and low-carbon transformation of the power system through joint optimization of flexible source-load-storage planning and scheduling, but also evaluate its contribution rate based on the VCG mechanism, ensuring cost recovery for all participants and improving the flexibility and economy of the power system.

[0065] (2) Under a given system carbon emission constraint, the present invention can achieve resource optimization and low-carbon transformation of the power system by jointly optimizing the planning and scheduling of flexible source, load and storage. It can determine the contribution rate and subsidies based on the VCG mechanism, ensure cost recovery for all participants, and improve the flexibility and economy of the power system. Attached Figure Description

[0066] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the method of the present invention;

[0067] Figure 2 This is a structural diagram of a carbon capture machine;

[0068] Figure 3 It is a source-load-storage response planning diagram;

[0069] Figure 4 This is the source-load-storage response operation diagram. Detailed Implementation

[0070] The present invention will be further illustrated below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments. It should be understood that these embodiments are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention. After reading this invention, any modifications of the invention in various equivalent forms by those skilled in the art will fall within the scope defined by the appended claims.

[0071] like Figure 1 As shown, this invention proposes a power system source-load-storage planning and operation method based on VCG, which includes the following steps:

[0072] Step 1: Obtain the power system planning parameters, including carbon capture unit and energy storage information;

[0073] Step 2: Obtain the operating parameters of the power system, including thermal power units, carbon capture units, lines, flexible loads, and carbon price information;

[0074] Step 3: Based on the power system planning parameters, obtain the planning model for the construction of carbon capture units and the configuration of energy storage capacity;

[0075] Step 4: Based on the power system operating parameters and the output of thermal power units and carbon capture units, obtain the source-load-storage operation model;

[0076] Step 5: Based on the planning model and operation model in Step 3, establish a joint solution model for power system planning and operation, and consider power balance constraints, line power constraints, thermal power unit constraints, and corresponding constraints of source-load-storage. Use the CPLEX solver to solve the model and obtain the daily planning and operation results of power system source-load-storage under different carbon prices, so as to achieve optimal resource allocation.

[0077] Step 6: Fix the daily planning schemes of power system source-load-storage under different carbon prices obtained from the solution, and evaluate the daily contribution of different energy storage and load aggregators based on the VCG mechanism according to the daily operation results.

[0078] Furthermore, in step 3, based on the power system planning parameters, the planning model for the construction of carbon capture units and the configuration of energy storage capacity is as follows:

[0079]

[0080] In the formula, C Inv To plan the total cost, C Inv,ESS For energy storage capacity configuration costs, C Inv,CCS The cost of carbon capture unit construction is given by subscripts e and g, which represent energy storage and carbon capture units, respectively. Ω ESS and Ω CCS These are energy storage units and carbon capture unit units, respectively, where l is the conversion rate, n is the service life of the energy storage, and λ is the energy storage unit. Ope This is the ratio of energy storage operation and maintenance costs to planning costs. To plan the unit cost of the rated power of energy storage e, The rated power configured for energy storage e To plan the unit cost of the rated capacity of energy storage e, The rated capacity configured for energy storage e The maximum capacity configured for energy storage e To plan the construction cost of carbon capture unit g, x g Let x be an integer variable representing whether carbon capture unit g has been constructed. g A value of 1 indicates the construction of the unit, x g A value of 0 indicates that the unit will not be built.

[0081] Furthermore, in step 4, the operational model for calculating the source, load, and storage is as follows:

[0082]

[0083] In the formula, C Ope For the total operating cost, C Ope,G C Ope,CCS C Ope,ESS and C Carbon These represent the operating costs of thermal power units, carbon capture units, energy storage, and carbon emission costs, respectively. N Day Ω represents the number of days in the target year of planning, where the subscripts t, y, and v represent the scheduling time, different typical scenarios in the planning year, and thermal power units, respectively. T Ω Y and Ω G These are the sets of scheduling times, the set of typical mid-year planning scenarios, and the set of thermal power units, respectively. yLet C2, C1, and C0 represent the probabilities of different typical scenarios, respectively, and let C2, C1, and C0 be the operating cost coefficients of thermal power unit v and carbon capture unit g, respectively. ESS C is the charging and discharging cost coefficient for energy storage. v SU The startup cost of thermal power unit v. This represents the startup status of thermal power unit v at time t in scenario y, where 1 indicates that thermal power unit v has started at time t, and 0 indicates that thermal power unit v has not started at time t. tax represents the carbon price. Let v be the carbon emission intensity of the thermal power unit at time t. and Let v be the active power generated by thermal power unit v and carbon capture unit g at time t, respectively, in scenario y. and Let be the charging and discharging power of energy storage e at time t in scenario y, respectively. Let g be the net CO2 emissions of carbon capture unit g at time t in scenario y.

[0084] Furthermore, in step 5, the power system planning-operation joint solution model and its corresponding constraints are as follows:

[0085] 1) Objective function

[0086] min Cost = C Inv +C Ope (A-5)

[0087] In the formula, Cost is the total system cost;

[0088] 2) Power balance and line power constraints

[0089]

[0090]

[0091] In the formula, the subscripts i, j, ij, and d represent nodes, branches, and loads, respectively, and Ω N , F(i,:), Ω B and Ω L These are the node set, the node set starting with node i, the branch set, and the load set, respectively. This represents the active power required by load d at time t in scenario y after participating in demand response. B represents the net output power of carbon capture unit g at time t in scenario y. ij θ represents the susceptance of branch ij. i,t,y and θ j,t,y Let be the phase angles of nodes i and j at time t in scenario y, respectively. The maximum capacity of branch ij;

[0092] 3) Constraints of thermal power units

[0093]

[0094]

[0095]

[0096]

[0097]

[0098]

[0099] In the formula, T represents the number of faces in the time period. and P represents the maximum and minimum active power output of the thermal power unit v at time t. v Ramp For the maximum ramping power of thermal power unit v, z v,t,y and Both are integer variables, representing the operating state and shutdown action of the thermal power unit v at time t in scenario y, respectively. v,t,y A value of 1 indicates that the thermal power unit v is in operation at time t, and 0 indicates that the thermal power unit v is in shutdown at time t. A value of 1 indicates that the thermal power unit v has a shut-off action at time t, and 0 indicates that the thermal power unit v has no shut-off action at time t. v On and T v Off These are the minimum start-up and shutdown times for thermal power unit v, respectively.

[0100] 4) Source-load-storage constraints

[0101]

[0102]

[0103]

[0104]

[0105]

[0106]

[0107]

[0108]

[0109]

[0110]

[0111]

[0112]

[0113]

[0114]

[0115]

[0116]

[0117]

[0118]

[0119]

[0120]

[0121]

[0122] In the formula, Let G be the base energy consumption of the carbon capture unit g, which does not change with the carbon capture status, and be set as a constant. Let g be the carbon capture operation energy consumption coefficient of carbon capture unit g. Let μ be the carbon emission intensity of the carbon capture unit g. g The CO2 capture rate of the carbon capture unit is between 80% and 95%. These represent the solution storage capacities of the carbon capture unit g at time t in scenario y, specifically the lean and rich liquid tanks. These are the maximum liquid storage capacities of the lean and rich liquid tanks of the carbon capture unit, respectively. These represent the initial solution storage capacities of the lean and rich liquid tanks of the carbon capture unit, respectively. These represent the maximum and minimum net output of the carbon capture unit g at time t, respectively. and These represent the maximum and minimum net CO2 emissions emitted by the carbon capture unit g at time t, respectively. This represents the maximum ramping power of the carbon capture unit g. and Let α represent the required active power and the active power available for demand response at time t for load d in scenario y, respectively. SL The load d is the adjustable coefficient. and Both are integer variables, representing the charging and discharging states of energy storage e at time t in scenario y. Let e ​​be the energy storage capacity of energy storage at time t in scenario y. and η represents the minimum and initial capacities of energy storage e, respectively. Ch and η Dis These are the charging and discharging efficiencies, respectively. This represents the maximum number of charge / discharge cycles per day for energy storage e.

[0123] Furthermore, in step 6, based on the operational results, the calculation steps for evaluating the daily contribution of different energy storage and load aggregators using VCG are as follows:

[0124]

[0125]

[0126]

[0127]

[0128]

[0129] In the formula, Cost2 and Cost 3,J and Cost 4,K Let r represent the daily operating cost considering all source-load-storage response, the daily operating cost considering the source-load-storage response excluding energy storage J, and the daily operating cost considering the source-load-storage response excluding load aggregator K, respectively. J and r K These represent the daily contributions of energy storage J and load aggregator K, respectively.

[0130] Case Analysis

[0131] This invention uses the IEEE 118-node power system retrofit example. The total installed capacity of generating units is 9.9662 GW, of which 4.426 GW is coal-fired and 5.5402 GW is gas-fired. The carbon emission intensity of coal-fired units is 0.7-0.9, and that of gas-fired units is 0.3-0.5. The coal-fired units that can be retrofitted as carbon capture units are units 45 and 40 (coal-fired) and units 29 and 25 (gas-fired). The power system nodes that can be configured with energy storage capacity are 25, 1, and 26. This invention is implemented using the GAMS optimization platform and the CPLEX solver is used to solve the MIQCP problem.

[0132] Based on this example, four comparative models were set up using the method of this invention:

[0133] Model I: Carbon price is not fixed, planning budget is not considered, but source-load-storage response is taken into account;

[0134] Model II: Fixed carbon price, considering planning budget and source-load-storage response;

[0135] Model III: Fixed carbon price, no planning budget, no source-load-storage response;

[0136] Model IV: Fixed carbon price, no planning budget, but source-load-storage response.

[0137] The planning results under Model I are presented (see Table 1 for results), and the planning and operation results under Model II are presented (see Table 2 for results). Figure 3 and Figure 4 The comparison of planning and scheduling results under Model I and Model II (see Table 2) and the contribution rates and subsidy results of different energy storage and load aggregators based on the VCG mechanism on a typical day under Model IV (see Table 3) show that, as carbon capture units can directly reduce carbon emissions, while energy storage can only indirectly change carbon emissions by changing generator output, when carbon prices increase, priority will be given to converting thermal power units into carbon capture units. When they cannot meet carbon emission constraints, different energy storage capacities will be configured in order of cost from low to high. When the power system faces high carbon prices, the energy storage capacity will be reduced. The results of Model II show that when the planning budget increases from 5×10... 5 $ increased to 5.5 × 10 5 At that time, although the unit power cost and unit capacity cost of ES1 were lower than those of ES2, the system simultaneously increased the capacity configuration of both ES1 and ES2; when the planning budget increased from 7×10 5 $ increased to 8×10 5 At that time, the system prioritized the retrofitting of thermal power units to reduce carbon emissions, resulting in a reduction of carbon emission costs by 5.202 × 10⁻⁶. 7 This indirectly controls the increase in total cost, indicating that different equipment combination configurations are non-incremental during the planning phase. Furthermore, within a certain range, increasing the planning budget is beneficial for achieving better system resource allocation to simultaneously meet the needs of low-carbon response and cost reduction. Comparing Model III and Model IV, considering source load response, fewer carbon capture units result in a 1.17 × 10⁻⁶ increase in carbon emissions. 6 The total cost and annual operating cost were reduced by 3.159 × 10⁻⁶ t, respectively. 6 $ and 5.5529×10 7 When considering source-load response, the daily load curve fluctuates less, with no significant peak-to-valley difference, reducing operating costs. Furthermore, considering source-load-storage response provides greater flexibility to the power system. Given that carbon capture units (CCUs) have higher planning costs and the ability to process CO2 to directly reduce carbon emissions compared to energy storage, fewer CCUs are built to reduce overall costs, but this also leads to an increase in system carbon emissions.

[0138] Therefore, considering source-load-storage response can not only optimize resource allocation, control system carbon emissions, and promote the low-carbon transformation of the power system, but also provide more flexibility and reduce the total system cost.

[0139] Table 1. Planning results under Model I

[0140] 40$ / t 60$ / t 70$ / t 90$ / t CCS1 (Taiwan) 1 1 1 1 CCS2 (Taiwan) 1 1 1 1 CCS3 (Taiwan) / 1 1 1 CCS4 (Taiwan) / / 1 1 ES1(MWh) 10 9.869 2.912 1.873 ES2(MWh) 11.031 / / / ES3(MWh) 2.182 / / /

[0141] Table 2. Planning and scheduling results under different models

[0142] Model III Model IV Number of carbon capture units (units) 3 2 Carbon emissions (Mt) 8.94 10.11 Total cost ($) 1.444373 1.441214 Annual operating costs (G$) 1.407350 1.351821

[0143] Table 3 Contribution

[0144] Contribution value Contribution rate ES1 11072.64 13.67％ ES2 8347.51 10.31％ ES3 7873.53 9.72％ Aggregator 1 10289.01 12.70％ Aggregator 2 9745.97 12.03％ Aggregator 3 10727.47 13.24％ Aggregator 4 11161.81 13.78％ Aggregator 5 11783.65 14.55％

[0145] This invention achieves optimized resource allocation and low-carbon transformation of the power system through the coordinated planning and scheduling of flexible power sources, loads and storage. Furthermore, it assesses the contribution of the power system based on the VCG mechanism, thereby improving the flexibility and economy of the power system.

[0146] The above description is merely a specific embodiment of the present invention, but the scope of protection of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any variations or substitutions that can be easily conceived by those skilled in the art within the scope of the technology disclosed in the present invention should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A power system source-load-storage planning and operation method based on VCG low-carbon demand response, characterized in that, The method includes the following steps: Step 1: Obtain the power system planning parameters, including carbon capture unit and energy storage information; Step 2: Obtain the operating parameters of the power system, including thermal power units, carbon capture units, lines, flexible loads, and carbon price information; Step 3: Based on the power system planning parameters, obtain the planning model for the construction of carbon capture units and the configuration of energy storage capacity; Step 4: Based on the power system operating parameters and the output of thermal power units and carbon capture units, obtain the source-load-storage operation model; Step 5: Based on the planning model in Step 3 and the operation model in Step 4, establish a joint solution model for power system planning and operation, and consider power balance constraints, line power constraints, thermal power unit constraints and corresponding constraints of source, load and storage. Use the CPLEX solver to solve the model and obtain the daily planning and operation results of power system source, load and storage under different carbon prices, so as to achieve optimal resource allocation. Step 6: Fix the daily planning schemes of power system source-load-storage under different carbon prices obtained from the solution, and evaluate the daily contribution of different energy storage and load aggregators based on the VCG mechanism according to the daily operation results; In step 3, based on the power system planning parameters, the planning model for the construction of carbon capture units and the configuration of energy storage capacity is as follows: (A-1) (A-2) (A-3) In the formula, To plan the total cost, Cost of configuring energy storage capacity, Bidding for the construction cost of carbon capture units and These represent energy storage and carbon capture units, respectively. and These are energy storage units and carbon capture unit units, respectively. For conversion rate, For the lifespan of energy storage, This is the ratio of energy storage operation and maintenance costs to planning costs. For planning energy storage The unit cost of rated power For energy storage The configured rated power, For planning energy storage The unit cost of the rated capacity For energy storage The configured rated capacity, For energy storage Maximum configured capacity, To plan carbon capture units Construction costs, To indicate carbon capture unit Whether to construct an integer variable, A value of 1 indicates the construction of this unit. A value of 0 indicates that the unit will not be built; In step 4, the operational model for calculating the source, load, and storage is as follows: (A-4) In the formula, For total operating cost, , , and These represent the operating costs of thermal power units, carbon capture units, energy storage, and carbon emission costs, respectively. To determine the number of days in the target year, use the subscript. , and These represent the scheduling time, different typical scenarios in the planning year, and thermal power units, respectively. , and These are respectively a set of scheduling times, a set of typical mid-year planning scenarios, and a set of thermal power units. The probabilities for different typical scenarios. , , thermal power units Carbon capture unit and energy storage Operating cost coefficient, This refers to the charging and discharging cost coefficient for energy storage. For thermal power units Startup costs, express In the scene thermal power units The startup status, 1 indicates thermal power units There is a startup action, 0 indicates thermal power units No startup action. For carbon prices, for thermal power units carbon emission intensity, and They are respectively In the scene thermal power units Carbon capture unit Active power generated and They are respectively In the scene Energy storage at all times The charging and discharging power, for In the scene Carbon capture unit of Net emissions.

2. The power system source-load-storage planning and operation method based on VCG low-carbon demand response according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step 5, the power system planning-operation joint solution model and its corresponding constraints are as follows: 1) Objective function (A-5) In the formula, This represents the total system cost. 2) Power balance and line power constraints (A-6) (A-7) In the formula, the subscript and These represent the branch and the load, respectively. , Represents two nodes of a branch. , , and They are respectively a set of nodes, and nodes The set of nodes, branches, and loads at the beginning. express In the scene Time load The active power required to participate in demand response. express In the scene Carbon capture unit Net output power, Indicates a branch susceptivity, and They are respectively In the scene Time Node and phase angle, branch road Maximum capacity; 3) Constraints of thermal power units (A-8) (A-9) (A-10) (A-11) (A-12) (A-13) In the formula, T represents the number of faces in the time period. and They are respectively thermal power units The maximum and minimum active power output, For thermal power units Maximum climbing power, and All are integer variables, representing respectively In the scene thermal power units Operating status and shutdown actions 1 indicates thermal power units In operation, 0 indicates thermal power units It is currently in a shutdown state. 1 indicates thermal power units There is a closing action, 0 indicates thermal power units No closing action. and thermal power units Minimum start and stop times; 4) Source-load-storage constraints (A-14) (A-15) (A-16) (A-17) (A-18) (A-19) (A-20) (A-21) (A-22) (A-23) (A-24) (A-25) (A-26) (A-27) (A-28) (A-29) (A-30) (A-31) (A-32) (A-33) (A-34) In the formula, For carbon capture units The basic energy consumption, which does not change with the carbon capture state, is set as a constant. For carbon capture units The energy consumption coefficient of carbon capture operation, For carbon capture units carbon emission intensity, For carbon capture units of The capture rate is between 80% and 95%. , Carbon capture units exist In the scene The solution storage capacity of the lean and rich liquid tanks at all times. , Carbon capture units The maximum storage capacity of the lean and rich liquid tanks; , Carbon capture units The initial solution storage capacity of the lean and rich liquid tanks, , They are respectively Carbon capture unit The maximum and minimum net output force, and They are respectively Carbon capture unit Maximum and minimum emitted Net emissions For carbon capture units Maximum climbing power, and respectively Scenario representation Time load The required active power and the active power available to participate in demand response. For load Adjustable coefficient, and All are integer variables, respectively In the scene Energy storage at all times The charging and discharging states, for In the scene Energy storage at all times Energy storage capacity, and Energy storage Minimum capacity and initial capacity, and These are the charging and discharging efficiencies, respectively. For energy storage The maximum number of charge / discharge cycles per day.

3. The power system source-load-storage planning and operation method based on VCG low-carbon demand response according to claim 2, characterized in that, In step 6, based on the operational results, the calculation steps for evaluating the daily contribution of different energy storage and load aggregators using VCG are as follows: (A-35) (A-36) (A-37) (A-38) (A-39) In the formula, , and These represent the daily operating costs considering all source-load-storage responses and the costs excluding energy storage, respectively. The daily operating costs of the source-load-storage response and consideration of excluding load aggregators The daily operating cost of the energy storage response, and They represent energy storage and load aggregator Daily contribution.

Images