Hydro power flexibility for power systems with variable renewable energy sources: an IEA Task 25 collaboration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydro power is one of the most flexible sources of electricity production. Power systems with considerable amounts of flexible hydro power potentially offer easier integration of variable generation, e.g., wind and solar. However, there exist operational constraints to ensure mid‐/long‐term security of supply while keeping river flows and reservoirs levels within permitted limits. In order to properly assess the effective available hydro power flexibility and its value for storage, a detailed assessment of hydro power is essential. Due to the inherent uncertainty of the weather‐dependent hydrological cycle, regulation constraints on the hydro system, and uncertainty of internal load as well as variable generation (wind and solar), this assessment is complex. Hence, it requires proper modeling of all the underlying interactions between hydro power and the power system, with a large share of other variable renewables. A summary of existing experience of wind integration in hydro‐dominated power systems clearly points to strict simulation methodologies. Recommendations include requirements for techno‐economic models to correctly assess strategies for hydro power and pumped storage dispatch. These models are based not only on seasonal water inflow variations but also on variable generation, and all these are in time horizons from very short term up to multiple years, depending on the studied system. Another important recommendation is to include a geographically detailed description of hydro power systems, rivers’ flows, and reservoirs as well as grid topology and congestion. WIREs Energy Environ 2017, 6:e220. doi: 10.1002/wene.220 This article is categorized under: Wind Power > Science and Materials Wind Power > Systems and Infrastructure
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.008 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".