1 | Program Name or Ancillary Texteere.energy.gov Water Power Peer Review CH TD Task 3.3.1 Water Use Optimization Presenter: John Gasper Organization:

1 | Program Name or Ancillary Text eere.energy.gov

Water Power Peer Review

CH TD Task 3.3.1 Water Use Optimization

Presenter: John GasperOrganization: Argonne National LaboratoryContact Info: Email: [email protected]

Phone: 202-488-2420Date: 11-03-2011

Water Use Optimization: Development and Demonstration of Advanced Forecasting, Power and Environmental Planning and Management Tools and Best Practices

Project Overview

Project Team:

2 | Wind and Water Power Program eere.energy.gov

Purpose, Objectives, & Integration

• Challenge: How to operate conventional hydropower plants in an increasingly uncertain and competitive water-constrained environment

– increasingly complex electricity markets– environmental constraints– water supply restrictions

• Purpose: Develop and demonstrate a hydropower water use optimization tool set that links water supply, power generation and ancillary services and environmental performance for planning and operations that :

– increases energy and grid services from available water– enhances environmental benefits from improved hydropower operations and planning.– proves useful, useable, used

• Water-Use Optimization Tool Set supports the DOE Water Power Program objectives to:

– increase the development and deployment of reliable, affordable, environmentally sustainable water power technologies

– better understanding water power technology potential for energy generation, and identifying and addressing the technical and nontechnical barriers to achieving this potential

• Project mission space is closely aligned and integrated with related Water Power Program projects (e.g., Environmental Performance & Siting, Water Power Grid Services, Hydropower Advancement Project, Basin Scale Opportunity Assessment)


Technical Approach

Develop a planning and operations management analytical tool set that integrates water availability, power generation and environmental performance

– 1. Day-ahead Scheduling and Real-time Operations: a modeling system for increasing hydropower efficiency value of both power generation and ancillary services.

– 2. Hydrologic Forecasting: a spatially-distributed modeling system that provides sub-daily to seasonal ensemble inflow forecasts

– 3. Environmental Performance: a system for incorporating ecological parameters and performance objectives

– 4. Unit and Plant Efficiency: analytical tools and metrics to measure and assess hydropower plant and project tool set performance

– 5. Seasonal Hydrosystems Analysis: a model for performing tradeoff and scenario analysis of medium to long term operations

Demonstrate power generation, ancillary service and environmental improvement through tool set applications

– 2- 5 applications in varied hydroclimatic and operational environments

Figure 1: Development and Demonstration of Advanced Hydropower Planning and Operational Decision Tools and Best

Practices

Hydropower Best Practices Identification, Assessment, Demonstration

Increase Hydropower Production

Improve Environmental Performance

Increase Hydropower Flexibility

Enhance Hydropower Economics

Hyd

rolo

gic

Fore

casti

ng

Enha

ncem

ent

Asse

t Sch

edul

ing

Enha

ncem

ent

Uni

t and

Pla

nt

Opti

miz

ation

Optimization Tool SetTesting & Demonstration

BaselineAssessment

.

.

.

.

.

...

.

...

Optimization Tool Set Development

Environmental Performance

Hydrologic Forecasting

Unit and Plant Efficiency

Day-ahead Scheduling and Real-time Operations

Seasonal Hydro-systems Analysis


Technical Approach (continued)

• Multi-National Laboratory project team– Argonne National Laboratory: Project coordination, Project lead for Day-

Ahead and Real Time Scheduling, Environmental Performance, Tool Set Integration

– Oak Ridge National Laboratory: project lead for Unit and Plant Efficiency– Pacific Northwest National Laboratory: project Lead for Hydrologic

Forecasting– Sandia National Laboratory: project Lead for Seasonal Hydrosystems

Analysis

• Technical review team of hydropower planners and operators– Inform project decisions

• Model and application priorities• Baseline data and characterizations

– Foster demonstrations • Secure demonstration sites• Facilitate demonstration


Plan, Schedule, & Budget

Schedule• Initiation date: November 2009• Planned completion date: February 2013• FY 10 Milestones

– Tool set component design– Recruitment of technical review team and identification of demonstration sites

• FY 11 Milestones– Tool set component development and integration

• FY 12/13 Milestones– Tool set testing and demonstration

Budget:

Budget History

FY2009 FY2010 FY2011/12

DOE Cost-share DOE Cost-share DOE Cost-share

$2M $2M $2M (anticipated)


Accomplishments and Results

Key technical accomplishments to date include:

• Tool Set Development– Met FY11 milestones of:

• Refinement of tool set component model designs and software

• Refinement of tool set component integration design and software

• Tool Set Demonstration– Finalized two demonstration sites – Met FY11 milestone to develop tool

set demonstration protocols


Challenges to Date

Tool Set Development– Development of software data for tool set components

– Developing and implementing processes for integration of tool set components

Tool Set Demonstration– Obtaining commitments from additional potential demonstration sites

• Upper organizational approvals• Staff resource requirements


Next Steps

• FY 12/13 milestones and deliverables – Test and refine toolset components at demonstration sites– Test and refine component integration software– Finalize additional demonstration sites, conduct demonstrations – Disseminate study results and products


Technical Approach

Toolset Architecture

Various hardware, software packages, and programming languages are used “behind the scenes”.

The user interacts with one program running on a single Windows PC which integrates all the components.

The user is presented with a consistent interface for using the toolset.

All data exchanges among tools are handled through a common DB which resides on the user’s PC.

The common DB can optionally reside on a server or other PC.

Single Windows PC

Common DB

Common DB

PNNL Server


DBDB


Day-Ahead and Real-Time

Operations

Seasonal HydroAnalysis

Other Exogenous Data


Model User

Spreadsheet Forms

Internet Internet

LINGO Optimization

DAKOTA Optimization


Technical Approach

Toolset Coordination

Tools do not communicate directly with one another. Data communication is handled through the common DB.

Using the GUI, the user enters system-wide information once which is then accessed by each tool (network structure, reservoir characteristics, power plant operating rules, etc…)

Hydrologic Forecasting starts the optimization. After that, each tool produces result data which is used as input by the others.

Conceptual Operation and Data Exchange

Seasonal Hydro Systems Analysis


Day Ahead Scheduling /

Real-Time Operations


Users may choose to enter their own data in place of using one or more of the tools.


Accomplishments and Next Steps

Toolset Integration Progress

Database design, implementation, and testing is nearly complete for each of the tools.

More detailed plans (beyond the scope of this presentation) have been developed covering the sequence of operations and data exchanges.

Implementation and verification of data exchanges are among FY12/13 milestones



SubTask CH TD 3.3.1.3 Day-ahead Scheduling and Real-time Operations ToolConventional Hydroelectric and Environmental Resource Systems (CHEERS) Model

Thomas D. Veselka

Organization: Argonne National LaboratoryContact Info: [email protected]: November 2, 2011

Laboratory Team:Thomas Veselka (Hydropower Expert & Computational Engineer) Mathew Mahalik (Power Systems & Computer Scientist) Mark Jusko (Decision Analyst & Computer Scientist) Sven Leyffer (Optimization and Mathematics) Todd Munson (Optimization and Mathematics)

Day-ahead Scheduling and Real-time Operations



• Improve the performance of hydroelectric and environmental resources through the development and application of an enhanced day-ahead scheduling and real-time operation tool

• The tool is consistent with DOE’s objective to increase the contribution of conventional hydropower to the U.S. renewable energy portfolio

– Helps schedulers and operators improve hydropower efficiency, generating more power with the same amount of water

– Improves the economic value of both hydropower generation and ancillary services– Strives to increase habitat quality– Supports power grid operations, including wind and solar integration– Provides cash-constrained organizations access to a cost-free tool

• Integrate with other toolkit components by using:– Inflows from the Hydrologic Forecast tool– Daily and weekly water release targets from the Seasonal Hydro-systems Analysis tool– Habitat parameters and relationships from the Environmental Performance tool– Power characteristics from the Unit and Plant Efficiency tool– Results for economic and environmental indicators posted to the shared DB


Technical Approach

• The design meets the requirements of a broad range of applications– Network formulation represents the flow of commodities such as water and electricity– Flexible scope and granularity in terms of time and space – Accommodates a wide range of topology designs– User-defined specifications

• System relationships & constraints• Component attributes • Boundary condition options

• Simultaneously solves energy and environmental objectives

1. Maximize production and economics within environmental operating constraints

2. Optimize environmental quality, resulting in a temporal sequence of dam water releases

3. Weighted multi-objective function



Schedule• Initiation date: November 2009• FY2010

– CHEERS Model Framework and Design Document V1.0 September 2010• Preliminary evaluation of mathematical techniques and solvers • Preliminary tool interface and input templates

• FY2011– Preliminary proof-of-concept mathematics completed– Complete tool functionality ready for application at demonstration sites

• F2012– Complete tool functionality ready for application at demonstration sites– Demonstration site application and continued tool refinements

• F2013– Demonstration site application wrap-up and documentation

Budget• Less spent than budgeted, but will accelerate substantially in FY2011• Additional staff have been recruited to assist with the tool GUI, DB, and model input forms

Budget History

FY2009 FY2010 FY2011/12


550K 550K 550K (anticipated)



•Work in progress on the GUI and data input screens (behind original schedule)– GUI manages project inventory (databases) – Can create and edit nodes, links, and system data through GUI menus and spreadsheet forms– Most spreadsheet input forms have been designed and implemented– Most input forms are successfully linked to the GUI and the database

– Can load, edit, and save data successfully– Database is mostly designed and implemented

– More tables need to be added and modified along with input form progress– Input and result values can be displayed in the network along nodes and links– Preliminary results spreadsheets have been created (e.g., energy balance, economic, unit dispatch, etc.)

•Work in progress on the mathematical formulation (behind original schedule)–Structure of the formulation and definition of equations is nearly complete–A stand-alone model consisting of a single spread sheet and LINGO was developed for prototyping and testing–Spreadsheet proof-of-concept for the formulation has been implemented–GUI successfully linked to LINGO solver–Work in progress on reading all data and creating all equations within the model

•Interaction with demo sites and others in hydro industry (on schedule)–Met with CDWR staff and toured demo site facilities. Also meet with WAPA schedulers and BOR plant dispatchers–Preliminary topologies for both demo sites systems have been drafted. Document detailing CRSP operational practices and constraints has been completed –Conducted web meetings with demo site staff and others to demonstrate model concepts, interface features, and receive feedback. Significant modification to operational rule approach based on feedback–Secure file server in place and being used with sensitive demonstration site data


Challenges to Date

• “Fool-proofing” input forms– Some possible user actions can cause errors or corrupt data– For the time being we will warn users of such actions

• Identifying all possible user actions and all data states when testing input form – database interaction– Input forms may behave differently depending on what data is currently

in the database• Optimization logistics

– Formulating the problem given the flexibility built into the input forms and modeling system

– Revisions of mathematical formulations may be required for more complex unit-commitment problems

– Need to explore alternative solvers including Dakota for consistency with the Seasonal tool, CPLEX, and gurobi


Next Steps

CHEERS Data Collection•Finalize network drawings for each demonstration site and collect basic information. (12/31/2011) •In CHEERS, finalize and construct demo site topology with a finer level of granularity. (3/31/2012) •Collect real-time data for model applications. (7/1/2012 - 9/30/2012)

Toolkit Database (DB)•Given initial demo site data and toolkit implementation plans, meet with DB representatives from the 4-lab modeling team to identify outstanding DB requirements for toolkit applications. (12/31/2011)•Enhance the toolkit DB to accommodate demo site data and toolkit modeling requirements. (4/1/2012 - 8/31/2012) •Complete algorithms that expedite data transfers between demo site SCADA systems and the toolkit DB. (9/30/2012)

CHEERS Demo Site Applications•Using the GUI, create CHEERS topologies, perform preliminary optimization runs and analyze model results (12/31/2011)•Refine CHEERS implementations and add topology details as needed for day-ahead scheduling. (3/31/2012)•Continue to refine/improve day-ahead scheduling optimization. (6/30/2012)•Perform preliminary CHEERS application for real-time operations. (9/30/2012)•Finalize demonstration site day-ahead scheduling and real-time CHEERS model applications. (12/31/2012)

CHEERS Model Enhancements•Refine and debug spreadsheet input forms. (9/1/2011 - 12/31/2011)•On an ongoing basis work with demo site staff to identify and implement supplementary model features to meet the specific requirements of each site. (1/31/2012 - 10/31/2012)•Create auxiliary spreadsheet tools to aid with demo site applications. (7/1/2012 - 9/30/2012)•Refine spreadsheet input forms to accommodate demo site real-time data requirements. (7/1/2012 - 8/31/2012)

CHEERS Model Application and DB Documentation•Document CHEERS demo site applications and performance metrics. (2/28/2013)



Water Use Optimization:Hydrologic Forecasting

Presenter: Mark Wigmosta

Organization: PNNLContact Info: [email protected]: 11/03/2011

Water Use Optimization


Mark Wigmosta, Nathalie Voisin, Andre Coleman, Richard Skaggs, Erik Venteris

PNNL

Dennis Lettenmaier, Vimal Mishra, and Shraddhanand ShuklaUniversity of Washington

HydrologicForecasting



Challenges: Lack of broadly available inflow forecasts to the nation’s reservoir system generally result in overly conservative operational constraints to meet multiple water use objectives and mitigate the impacts of hydrologic extremes (flood, drought). Overly conservative constraints limit the opportunity to optimize electricity generation, environmental performance, and efficient water utilization.

Objectives: Integrate and enhance PNNL and University of Washington/Princeton University Ensemble Forecast Systems to provide a national multi-scale streamflow forecasting system for the optimization toolbox •Meteorological and streamflow forecasts at multiple user defined temporal and spatial scales (input to project components 1, 3, and 5)•Longer lead times with reduced forecast uncertainty•Basis for relaxation of constraints without increasing risk•Increased opportunity for plant to system optimization


Technical Approach

This Project Delivers to DOE and the Forecast Community:

• DOE & hydropower industry forecast requirements in the face of increased competition for water– Traditional objectives (power, flood control,

irrigation/water supply)– Emerging needs for renewable integration

and environmental requirements– Non-stationary impacts from climate

variability and increasing population/demand

• Physics-based, distributed hydrologic model

• Consistent, national approach for multi-scale ensemble streamflow forecasting

• Automated assimilation of spatial and temporal data



Schedule• Initiation date: Nov, 2009• Planned completion date: February, 2013• Milestones for FY10 and FY11

– Design document for integrated forecast model (FY10) - completed– Evaluation of remote sensing and alternative ensemble forecasts (FY10) - completed– Install UW/PU forecast system on PNNL high performance compute cluster (FY10) - completed– Prototype integration of PNNL and UW/PU forecast systems (FY11) - completed– Prototype of advanced data assimilation in integrated model (FY11) - completed– Initiate collaboration with National Weather Service (FY11) - completed– Initial application of forecast system to one demonstration basin (FY11) – completed in two basins– Preliminary seasonal forecasts in one demonstration basin (FY11) – completed in two basins

– Preliminary medium range forecasts in one demonstration basin (FY11) – completed in two basins

– Retrospective analysis of forecast accuracy in one demonstration basin (FY11) – completed in two basins

• Milestones for FY12 and FY13– Demonstrate operability of forecast system at multiple sites– Successful integration in optimization toolbox

Budget History

FY2009 FY2010 FY2011/12


$400K* $400K$400

(anticipated)

*

*



• Completed Forecast System Design Document (FY10)

• Completed evaluation of remote sensing and alternative ensemble forecast methodology (FY10)

• Installation of UW/PU forecast system on PNNL computer cluster (FY10)– Ongoing modernization and optimization of core software– More flexible and generic approach

• Prototype Enhanced Hydrologic Forecast System (EHFS) (FY11)

• Initial application in two demonstration basins: Feather River, CA and Gunnison River, CO (FY11)

– Calibration– Seasonal forecasts– Medium-range forecasts – Retrospective evaluation



Multi-scale Ensemble Hydrologic Forecast System is operational with preliminary retrospective analysis of seasonal and medium-range (1 – 14 day lead) forecasts.

1990 - 2005

Feather River Basin, CA

1998



Gunnison River Basin, CO

1990 - 2005

Multi-scale Ensemble Hydrologic Forecast System is operational with preliminary retrospective analysis of seasonal and medium-range (1 – 14 day lead) forecasts. Impact of upstream regulation requires further study.

1998


Challenges to Date

• Modernization and optimization of core software architecture in current forecast systems– Upgrade inefficient system/platform specific software– Provide capacity for distributed computing– Development of robust and autonomous system

• Data assimilation– Spatially distributed (vs. lumped), physics-based model– Integration of multiple data sources (satellite and ground-based) and

corresponding state variables• Spatially-distributed weather forecasts

– Multiple temporal scales– Downscaling– Ensembles

• Development of nationally consistent and autonomous system– Multiple spatial scales (subbasin – basin)– Multiple temporal scales (day-ahead to seasonal)– Consistent methodology and input datasets for national application


Next Steps

• Project Plans and Schedule

– Refine forecast requirements from operators and study team

– Integrate forecast system within Water Use Optimization Toolset

– Refine forecast system for improved application in demonstration basins

– Evaluate performance and benefit to water use optimization

• Next Steps

– DOE and hydropower industry forecast requirements• Traditional objectives• Renewable integration• Climate variability/change

– Continue interaction with NOAA National Weather Service Office of Hydrologic Development• Calibration of ensemble weather forecasts• Automated data assimilation• Future integration into NWS Community Hydrologic Prediction System• DOE-NOAA MOU



Water Use Optimization:Environmental Performance

Presenter: John W. Hayse

Argonne National [email protected] 3, 2011

CH_TD 3.3.1.5

John W. Hayse – Argonne National LaboratorySamrat Saha – Argonne Postdoctoral Appointee

Yetta Jager – Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Kenneth Ham – Pacific Northwest National Laboratory




Purpose:

• Consider environmental objectives as part of integrated tool set

• Explicitly consider environmental performance & hydropower value during operational planning

• Simultaneously consider potentially conflicting objectives

• Evaluate operational scenarios

Objectives:

• Develop and demonstrate a method to measure environmental performance under different hydropower operations

– Incorporate environmental considerations into operational planning

– Provide a means for comparing environmental performance of different operations

– Allow optimization “hook” for hydropower planning activities

– Exchange information with other toolset components via shared database

• Integrate with Instream Flows Tasks (CH_MA 4.1.3) (information exchange)


Technical Approach

• Identify/develop method for linking environmental parameters and instream flow conditions

• Link evaluation process with other toolset components• Test and apply to demonstration sites (FY12)

– optimization of operational strategies

– evaluate costs of meeting environmental objectives

– analysis and comparison of operational scenarios



Schedule: Initiated November 2009; complete February, 2013

Budget History

FY2009 FY2010 FY2011/2012


$300K ▬ $300K ▬ $300K ▬

Milestones

FY 2010 • Evaluated types of environmental metrics to target and information needs for evaluating performance

• Initial identification of integration pathways with other tool set components

FY 2011 • Developed environmental evaluation methodology framework• Explored integration requirements• Developed initial draft software tool for calculating environmental performance scores and

exchanging information with shared database• Initiated identification of environmental issues and objectives for demonstration sites

FY 2012 • Prepare working version environmental performance evaluation tool• Finalize identification of environmental objectives and relationships between flows and pertinent

environmental metrics for demonstration sites• Test functionality of environmental performance tool for demonstration site information; refine as

needed

Funding divided equally among partner laboratories



• Developed method for scoring environmental performance– “Index of River Functionality” (IRF)– Based on river ecosystem principles (magnitude, duration, timing, and frequency of

occurrence of flows)– based upon degree to which site-specific environmental objectives (identified by

users) are accomplished– Allows multiple metrics to be considered simultaneously– Allows prioritization of specific objectives– Can accommodate a variety of common types of environmental metrics (both in and

out-of-channel objectives can be addressed)

• Preliminary development of software component completed– Steps user through data entry to define environmental objectives– Draws information from and sends results to database– Calculates IRF as a function of flow time series

• Gathered/reviewed information for demonstration sites– Identification of environmental concerns (objectives)– Initial identification of relevant environmental relationships for objectives



ORNL (Jager)• Methodology for estimating relationships between hydropower

operations and fish growth and survival that can be incorporated into the environmental performance planning tool.

• Testing, integration, and demonstration of IRF Tool• Development of project reports, manuscripts, and presentations

PNNL (Ham)•Methodology for estimating relationships between hydropower operations and fish passage survival that can be incorporated into the environmental performance planning tool.• Testing, integration, and demonstration of IRF Tool• Development of project reports, manuscripts, and presentations

Argonne (Hayse/Saha)• Development of IRF methdology.• Developing computer code for IRF Tool• Compiling and reviewing environmental information for demo

sites• Testing, integration, and demonstration of IRF Tool• Development of project reports, manuscripts, and presentations


Next Steps

• Complete working version of environmental performance evaluation tool and work with other component teams to complete integration

• Finalize identification of environmental objectives and relationships between flows and pertinent environmental metrics for demonstration sites

• Test functionality of environmental performance tool using demonstration site information

• Refine environmental performance evaluation tool as needed

• Presentations/publications/reports



CH TD SubTask 3.3.1.5 Unit and Plant Efficiency

Presenter: Brennan SmithOrganization: Oak Ridge National LaboratoryContact Info: Email: [email protected] Phone: 865-241-5160Date: 11-03-2011

Water Use Optimization:Unit and Plant Efficiency

Study Team: Brennan T. SmithQin Fen Zhang



Technical ApproachRelationship between Optimization Toolset and HAP

– WBS 3.3.1.5 Unit and Plant Efficiency: analytical tools and metrics to measure and assess hydropower plant and project tool set performance

The Hydropower Advancement Project (HAP; WBS 3.1.1.1) provides unit and plant efficiency tools, metrics, and data for the optimization toolset

HAP Objective #4: Development and Dissemination of Best Practices, Assessment, and Analysis Tools to Maximize US Hydropower Asset Performance and ValueHAP Standard Assessment Protocol•Condition Assessment

– Design Information Review– O&M and Upgrade Information Review– Site Pre-Visit– Quantitative Condition Ratings– Joint (Assessor/Owner/Operator) Engineering Discussion

•Performance Assessment– Detailed Performance Data Request – hourly data typical– Central Dispatch Visit (as needed)– Quantitative Performance Analyses– Joint (Assessor/Operator/Dispatcher) Performance Discussion • Site Visit – clarification, review, photographs, preliminary

findings•Condition and Performance Reporting

– Draft Assessment Report– Report Acceptance and Finalization

= f (h, QPH)

I is Installed Efficiency0 is State-of-the Art EfficiencyA is Actual (current) Efficiency

HAP Performance Assessment will examine trends across many projects: how much of the available potential energy (PS) has historically been converted (PPA) and how much could be converted with an upgrade to state-of-the-art technology and operations (PP0)

HAP Performance Assessment scope is limited to individual plants and assumes local optimization of unit commitment and load; hydro-system context for dispatch decisions is provided by the Optimization Toolset



SubTask CH TD 3.3.1.7 Seasonal Hydrosystems Analysis and Optimization

Presenter: Thomas S Lowry

Sandia National Laboratories505-284-9735, [email protected] 3, 2011Hydropower Seasonal Concurrent Optimization for Power and the Environment

(HydroSCOPE) Model

Laboratory Team:Thomas Lowry (Hydrological Modeling & Model Development)Janet Barco (Hydrological Modeling & Data Processing)Asmeret Bier (Optimization & Mathematics)Daniel Villa (Data Collection and Processing) Seasonal

Hydro- systems Analysis



Purpose:

Create a basin-scale seasonal to multi-seasonal simulation and optimization tool that balances hydrologic forecasts against power generation capacities, operational constraints, competing water users, and environmental performance

Challenges and Barriers Being Met:• Ties short-term and long-term decisions into a single framework• Provides rapid evaluation of multiple future scenarios• Simulates and optimizes across multiple metrics/objectives

Link to Program Mission and Objectives:• Increase power production by optimizing operations within the myriad of constraints• Allow for rapid evaluation of new technologies and environmental performance• Evaluate new development within the regulatory framework

Integration with Full Project:• Utilizes Improved Hydrologic Forecasting (PNNL)• Informs and is informed by Day Ahead and Real Time Planning Model (ANL)• Utilizes Environmental Performance Task (ANL)


Technical Approach

Technical Approach:• Simulation engine uses an object-oriented network archetype within a system

dynamics framework (nodes and links)• Linkages and flux terms use standard physics-based algorithms• Optimization uses the ‘multi-objective genetic algorithm’ (MOGA) from Sandia’s open

source DAKOTA optimization software (see dakota.sandia.gov)• Capable of single or multi-objective optimization

Issues:• Keeping computational overhead at a ‘workable’ level• Data processing for ‘effective’ parameters• Codifying operations• Determining default operations from which to optimize

Uniqueness of Approach:• Simulates water quality (temperature), water quantity, and energy production while

accounting for physical, operational, and environmental constraints• Fast simulation times with immediate feedback• Object oriented architecture is easily extended and modified• Scalable from a single project to basin-scale, multi-project systems• Fully coupled simulation and multi-objective optimization tool


Technical Approach

Solar radiationCloud CoverWind speedAir temperatureHumidity / Dew PointRainfall

Internal mixing

Surface mixing

Outflow mixing

Inflow ForecastsT, Q Withdrawals

QDischargesT, Q

River SimulationLongitudinal 1-d

Temperature, flow, depth

Reservoir SimulationVertical 1-d temperature

Inflowmixing

DischargesT, Q

WithdrawalsQ

Sur

face

Hea

t E

xcha

nge

Optimized ReservoirOperations

EnvironmentalConstraints Inflow Forecasts

T, QT, Q

Items in red calculated in this sub-task. Items in blue are from the other sub-tasks. Items in black are input data.

T, Q, h



Schedule• Initiation date: October, 2009• Planned completion date: February, 2013• FY10 and FY11 Milestones (each completed and delivered on time):

– March, 2010: Create a white paper and graphical illustration of the conceptual model– June, 2010: Identify and document optimization scheme and develop governing equations.– Sept., 2010: Complete coding of model framework into the new development platform. Create model

documentation and process descriptions paper.– Dec., 2010: Develop optimization report describing the approach and method of implementation– March, 2011: Development and verification of connected stream-reservoir model. – June, 2011: Create model documentation and process descriptions paper and the optimization

capabilities– Sept., 2011: Progress report on simulation model development, optimization capabilities, model

integration, and demonstration site applicationBudget: • There are no significant variances to the budget

Budget History

FY2009 FY2010 FY2011/12


$300k $0k $500k $0k$500k

(anticipated)$0k



• Simulation engines are working and being verified against data from the McKenzie River, Oregon– Reservoir model shows good agreement to reservoir outflow

temperature data and reservoir vertical profile data– River model agrees well with detailed CE-QUAL-W2 model

Model simulated vertical temperature profiles in Cougar reservoir, McKenzie River, OR as compared to data.

Model simulated seven-day average of the maximum daily temperature for the McKenzie River, OR at its confluence with

the Willamette River as compared to the ODEQ CE-QUAL-W2 model.



• Working linkage between the simulation engine and optimization routine. – Testing on a single reservoir configuration while optimizing for

power generation

Pareto front from single reservoir test simulations. The green dots arePareto optimal for maximizing environmental performance and power

generation. Actual power generation is the negative of the x-axis values.



• Initial development of seasonal I/O spreadsheet template


Challenges to Date

• Keeping computational overhead low

• Codifying operations and time-dependent constraints

• Data processing• Developing ‘effective’ parameters (e.g. stream shading)

• Developing default operations from which to optimize

• Dealing with uncertainty• Hydrological

• Meteorological

• Environmental

• Visualization of optimization output

Example of an ‘effective’ parameter:Effective shading for 22 sub-reaches of the lower Gunnison as afunction of the time of year. The Average Daily Shade is thereduction in solar radiation integrated over the hours of daylight.


Next Steps

• Model Development– Add ice dynamics (needed for Colorado demonstration site)– Unify the stream and reservoir models– Codify operations– Streamline I/O– Develop generic execution scripts– Test and verify

• Integration– Develop user spreadsheet I/O templates– Link with GenForm2 GUI and MySQL database– Develop methods to visualize output

• Demonstration– Complete data processing, model testing and verification– Perform demonstration as per the project demonstration protocol


Next Steps

• Ideas for ‘Beyond Project’ Development*– Future climate scenarios

– Simulate energy and water demands (agriculture, municipal, etc.) as a function of hydrologic forecasts and current conditions

– Pumped-back storage

– Simulate biological and environmental response

– Low-head, run of river projects

– Web-based interface

– Grid-scale optimization (with other energy sources, electric grid configuration, market dynamics, etc.)

*Items generally ordered top to bottom as least difficult to most difficult to execute.


Additional Slides

The following slides are for information purposes only


Guidelines for number of slides(Not a template slide – for information purposes only)

• Most presenters this year will be allotted between 10 and 20 minutes for the presentation with 5 to 10 minutes reserved for Q&A. Thus, shorter presentations should contain a maximum of 10 presented slides, with no more than 1 slide per minute for longer presentations.

• The bulk of your presentation/discussion should be devoted to the “Technical Approach,” “Accomplishments and Results,” and “Next Steps” sections, depending on how much work has been completed


Preparation Instructions (Not a template slide – for information purposes only)

• Do not include any proprietary, copyrighted, or confidential information. Do not mark any slide with “Official Use Only” or any similar restriction used by your organization.

• Please name your electronic MS PowerPoint presentation file as follows (use the first 4 letters of your title):

[Title_Organization_LastName.ppt].

• Do not incorporate animation or special effects since all presentations will be saved as PDF files for presentation and for posting on the web. Animations critical to describing the project may be presented as separate files, however they must be approved by the Program and presented within your allotted time.


Final Instructions (Not a template slide – for information purposes only)

• Your presentation, in MS PowerPoint format, is due to Ed Eugeni at [email protected] by September 27th. If your presentation is too large to email, contact Ed Eugeni at 240-223-5552 for alternative delivery options.

• Reviewers will be receiving your presentation prior to the meeting. In order to supply adequate time for the reviewers to review your material prior to the meeting, you MUST submit your presentation by close of business on September 27th. Your project is subject to a score reduction penalty if you fail to meet this deadline.


Questions? (Not a template slide – for information purposes only)

• Contact: – Hoyt Battey at [email protected],

202-586-0143– or Ed Eugeni at [email protected],

240-223-5552

Documents

1 | Program Name or Ancillary Texteere.energy.gov Water Power Peer Review CH TD Task 3.3.1 Water Use Optimization Presenter: John Gasper Organization: