Distributed flexibility as a cost-effective alternative to grid reinforcement

TL;DR

This paper evaluates the cost-effectiveness of using distributed flexibility, such as prosumer batteries and PV control, as an alternative to costly grid reinforcement in low-voltage networks with high PV penetration.

Contribution

It introduces a method to compare distributed flexibility costs with traditional grid reinforcement costs under controlled prosumer assets.

Findings

Distributed flexibility is more profitable than grid reinforcement beyond 145% PV coverage.

Controlling prosumer batteries and PV can mitigate technical issues without costly reinforcement.

Flexibility deployment reduces overall system costs for high PV penetration scenarios.

Abstract

The deployment of distributed photovoltaics (PV) in low-voltage networks may cause technical issues such as voltage rises, line ampacity violations, and transformer overloading for distribution system operators (DSOs). These problems may induce high grid reinforcement costs. In this work, we assume the DSO can control each prosumer's battery and PV system. Under such assumptions, we evaluate the cost of providing flexibility and compare it with grid reinforcement costs. Our results highlight that using distributed flexibility is more profitable than reinforcing a low-voltage network until the PV generation covers 145% of the network annual energy demand.