Transmission Expansion Planning Considering Battery

Energy Storage Systems and Intraday Time Constraints

Dany H. Huanca1 and Djalma M. Falcão2*
1,2* Department of Electrical Engineering, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, COPPE,
Av. Pedro Calmon, 550, Rio de Janeiro, 21941-901, Brazil.

*Corresponding author(s). E-mail(s): djalmafalcao@coppe.ufrj.br;

Contributing authors: dany.huanca@coppe.ufrj.br;

Abstract
In transmission expansion planning (TEP), energy storage systems, particularly batteries, can be con-
sidered as non-wires alternatives since they can reduce the installation of new lines to meet demand
peaks. This work studies the representation of the daily cycle charge and discharge of battery energy
storage systems (BESS), and its interaction with non-dispatchable renewable generation, considering
intraday time constraints. The TEP problem is formulated as a mixed nonlinear integer programming
using a DC power flow model and solved with a specialized genetic algorithm. The modified Garver’s
test system and a 93-bus electrical test system are used to assess the proposed typical formulation
using costs for network components and storage systems. The results show how the deferral of the
construction of new lines is feasible if additional batteries are connected to certain nodes, even consid-
ering the variation of renewable sources. The cost of lines is reduced by 9.09% for the Garver system
and 10.57% for 93-bus.

Keywords: Transmission expansion planning, genetic algorithm, DC model, battery energy storage systems.

1 Introduction and solar. Therefore, the consideration of NWA

Transmission expansion planning (TEP) consists
in the determination of location, timing, and
capacity of new components to reinforce the trans-
mission system to cope with forecasted demand
increase in a defined horizon. Traditionally, the
new components considered are new transmis-
sion lines or the capacity increase of existing
ones. Recently, non-wires alternatives (NWA), like
energy storage systems (ESS), have been proposed
to relieve forecasted congestion and, therefore, to
defer the deployment of new components in the
transmission system [1]. This is particularly ade-
quate in the case of power system with high per-
centage of non-dispatchable generation like wind
in the TEP problem formulation has become a
relevant research topic.
The TEP may be modeled as a single-stage
or multi-stage optimization problem. In the first
case, the transmission new components are sched-
uled to be commissioned at the end of the analysis
horizon. In the second, the new components are
supposed to be commissioned in intervals along
the horizon. In both cases, the general formula-
tion is as a mixed nonlinear integer programming
problem which usually presents difficulties for the
solution owing to its combinatorial nature and
the possibilities of several local minima. Most

1
of the solution methods reported in the litera-
ture use appropriated formulations to represent
the transmission system, being the DC model
usually chosen [2]. Nonlinear power flow mod-
els may be used but the accuracy obtained does
not compensate for the numerical difficulties for
the solution. The main approaches to the TEP
solution can be classified as: classical optimiza-
tion algorithms (Benders decomposition method,
Branch and Bound method, linear programming
and quadratic programming) [3, 4]; constructive
heuristic algorithms (using the transport model,
DC model, and mixed model) [5, 6]; and meta-
heuristics algorithms (genetic algorithms, taboo
search, ant colony, simulated annealing, grasp
algorithm, and scattered search) [7–9].
Integrating energy storage in the TEP prob-
lem has the potential to defer or prevent the need
for constructing new transmission lines [10]. The
TEP problem considering energy storage systems
introduces new requirements in the problem mod-
eling. These systems usually present a daily cycle
of charge and discharge that introduces the need
for intraday time constraints. Larger cycles may
be considered in the case of energy storage systems
with large storage capacity.
The authors in [11, 12] present a mathematical
formulation to solve the TEP problem while con-
sidering transmission lines and storage systems.
A mixed integer linear programming is used to
solve the problem both in the short- and long-
term scenarios. In [13] it is presented the optimal
allocation of the type of compressed air storage
in a co-optimized electricity market. In [14] a
study of the impact of the energy storage system
on the TEP problem using a genetic algorithm
is described. In [15], it is proposed a model of
planning for the expansion of long-term trans-
mission networks considering storage systems and
renewable generation source through the formu-
lation of mixed integer linear programming. The
authors in [16] developed a theoretical framework
of analysis to study the interaction between cen-
tralized transmission planning and decentralized
transmission planning considering the storage sys-
tem. In [17], it is presented a method to solve
the TEP problem considering renewable sources
and storage systems, and that minimizes the dif-
ference between operating costs and investment
costs, simultaneously using the AC power flow
model and stochastic programming.
2
In [18] it is presented the extension of the
TEP problem to consider ESS and in [19] a Ben-
ders decomposition technique is used for to solve
the TEP problem that determines the location of
ESS in the network and how the energy storage
might be used for the demand shifting and trans-
mission upgrade deferral. Reference [20] presents
a mixed-integer programming model to solve the
TEP problem considering the costs and benefits
incorporating BESS devices and multiple planning
periods in a competitive electricity market. More-
over, BESS and FACTS devices are considered to
solve the TEP problem in [21]. A study of the TEP
problem is presented in [22] considering batteries
in a market-driven environment, and in [23] N-
1 security constraint and battery storage systems
placement are applied, and Benders’ decomposi-
tion to the large-scale expansion planning problem
is used to reduce the computational burden.
Genetic algorithms have been widely adopted
in the specialized literature to solve the TEP prob-
lem due to its effectiveness [7, 24]. Additionally,
the Chu-Beasley genetic algorithm (CBGA) has
been introduced to tackle the TEP problem [25–
29]. Despite the report of CBGA in the literature,
none of the published works have employed it
to address the TEP problem in conjunction with
BESS devices and transmission lines.
In this work, the optimal placement of BESS
devices is decided by taking into account intra-
day time constraints. In contrast to Refs. [11, 12],
this document presents the mathematical model
for the inclusion of BESS devices in the expansion
planning of the transmission system considering
the daily cycle of charge and discharge of BESS
devices. The proposed approach, which is intended
to be used with intraday time constraints, is sup-
ported by a specialized genetic algorithm. The
CBGA provides the necessary information to the
planning entity to determine how to expand the
construction of new transmission lines with siz-
ing and placement of BESS devices. Although the
emphasis of the proposal is on utilizing batter-
ies as storage systems, the algorithm is adaptable
and can be utilized with other types of storage
systems.
The novel contributions of this paper are
twofold:
• Incorporating BESS devices into the planning of
long-term transmission line expansion by deter-
mining both the optimal transmission network
expansion and the placement of the BESS simul-
taneously, taking into account intraday time
constraints to represent the daily cycle of charge
and discharge of battery energy storage sys-
tems and considering no-dispatchable renewable
generation (wind farms).
• A specialized genetic algorithm is utilized as an
optimization technique to address intraday time
constraints in transmission expansion planning,
incorporating BESS devices.
The remainder of this paper is organized as
follows: section 2 shows the representation of stor-
age systems of energy for the TEP problem. The
development of the mathematical formulation con-
sidering BESS devices and CBGA to solve the
TEP problem are presented in section 3 and 4,
respectively. Section 5 shows the tests and results.
Finally, the conclusions are presented in section 6.
2 Representation of energy
storage systems in the TEP
problem
The simplest formulation of the TEP problem
considers a single generation and demand sce-
nario, corresponding to a situation considered the
most severe for the transmission system on the
studied horizon. In the multi-stage formulation,
different scenarios are considered, representing the
temporal evolution of demand and generation in
consecutive steps of the planning horizon. Some
formulations of the problem consider different sce-
narios of generation at the same stage, to represent
different options due to market rules, availability
of generators, weather conditions, or fuel prices
[30].
The representation of energy storage systems
in the TEP problem introduces difficulties in mod-
eling due to time constraints associated with the
charge and discharge cycle of these systems and
the time variation of renewable energy sources
output. Depending on the technology used and the
capacity of the ESS, an hourly representation, or
even shorter intervals, is recommended. However,
given that the TEP problem can contemplate hori-
zons of several years, this kind of discretization is
3
computationally unfeasible. Therefore, it is nec-
essary to find approximate ways to represent the
temporal constraints on the TEP problem.
Some approaches to represent ESS in the
TEP problem are found in the literature. In [15],
demand blocks correlated with the generation of
renewable sources are used. These blocks are con-
structed based on demand duration curves. In [31],
the concepts of seasonal periods and typical days
are used to develop simplified scenarios of daily
generation and demand variation.
In this paper, an approach based on energy sce-
narios and typical days is proposed for the TEP
problem. Demand information and variable renew-
able generation are organized according to shown
in Fig. 1. The annual period is divided into energy
scenarios corresponding to rainy or drought sea-
sons (winter or summer), greater or lesser wind
and demand occurrence. For each of these energy
scenarios, i.e., winter or summer, typical days are
established, to which correspond demand curves,
renewable generation outputs and energy storage
level.
These curves are subsequently staggered into
so many discrete levels as considered appropriate.
The staggered demand and generation curves form
the scenarios that will be considered in the formu-
lation of the TEP problem. The higher is the level
of detail in this representation, the more accu-
rate it will be the problem modeling. However,
to maintain the computational effort required for
the model solution within reasonable limits, it is
necessary to limit the number of elements rep-
resentation (scenarios, typical days and curves
levels).
As an illustrative example of this modeling, the
following attributes are assumed:
• Energy scenarios: winter (W) and summer (S),
• Typical days: weekdays (Wd) and weekends
(We),
• Load levels: light load (LL), medium load (ML),
and heavy load (HL).
Thus, the scenario tree will be represented as
in Fig. 2. In this case, the TEP problem is modeled
with twelve scenarios of variable renewable gener-
ation and demand. Therefore, this work consider
twelve scenarios.
The generation of scenarios by the method-
ology proposed in this section can be performed
from demand forecasts at the network nodes,
Fig. 1 Scenarios generation for the TEP problem.

Fig. 2 Scenario tree for the TEP problem representation.

the current and expected configuration of gen- response time and high energy efficiency. However,
erators, and historical data of the behavior of BESS devices have some disadvantages, such as
these variables, through data analysis techniques short lifespan, high investment cost, high mainte-
and machine learning. Alternatively, they can be nance, and heat sensitive [22].
obtained from the analysts’ experience, through
subjective evaluation. 3.1 BESS mathematical model
The mathematical model to describe the energy
3 Mathematical formulation stored in a battery is based on [20, 22]. Normally
in a battery, the storage level at the instant (t +
The TEP problem is an optimization problem that
1) depends on the energy stored at the previous
typically determines the expansion of the electrical
instant of time (t). Therefore, when the battery
network at the lowest possible cost while satisfying
is being charged, the storage level of the battery
the peak demand of the electrical system.
corresponds to:
On the other hand, batteries are electrochem-
ical devices that can mitigate peak loads, reduce
Sbi (t + 1) = Sbi (t) − ηc × Pbi (t) × ∆t; if Pbi (t) < 0
line overloads, and improve congestion preven-
(1)
tion while transmission lines are being built [14].
Among other advantages of batteries are the fast

4
and when the battery is being discharged it is zi , z1i ∈ {0, 1} ∀i ∈ ΩΓ (11)
represented as follows:
In this formulation, the binary variables zi , z1i
1 and the maximum number of BESS devices z are
Sbi (t + 1) = Sbi (t) − × Pbi (t) × ∆t; if Pbi (t) > 0
ηd added. The binary variable zi is set to 1 if the
(2) battery has been placed and 0 otherwise. The
remaining binary variable is used to differentiate
where Sbi (t) is the battery energy storage level at charge and discharge. When z1i = 0 the energy
time t, ηc and ηd represent the efficiency coefficient storage level is Sbi = Pb+i ∆t, which means that the
of charge and discharge of batteries, and Pbi (t) is battery is being charged, i.e., the behavior of the
the power flow at time t, and ∆t is the length of battery is like a load. When z1i = 1 the energy
the interval considered. storage level is Sbi = Pb−i ∆t, which means that the
Equations (3) and (4) represent power con- battery is being discharged, i.e., the behavior of
straint (there is maximum and minimum power the battery is like a generator.
flow the battery can provide) and energy con- Worth noting that the difference between this
strain (batteries feature a maximum and mini- formulation and the formulation compared with
mum storable energy). the work [22] is in constraints (8) and (9), which
means that the output power of the battery is
Pbmin
i
≤ Pbi (t) ≤ Pbmax
i
(3) between zero and its maximum level of energy
Sbmin ≤ Sbi (t) ≤ Sbmax (4) storage. This modification is only to represent
i i
the energy storage level in the daily charge and
where Pbmin , Pbmax represent lower and upper discharge cycle of the batteries. Furthermore, in
i i
limit of power injection battery at bus i, and this formulation it is not necessary to use a
Sbmin , Sbmax , represent lower and upper of the large enough positive constant M as established in
i i
energy stored in a battery at bus i. [20, 22], since in this paper a specialized genetic
The previous formulation is nonlinear since algorithm is used to the placement of batteries and
Eqs. (1) and (2) relies on the direction of power lines.
flow. In order to avoid this nonlinearity, the
equations used to model batteries are restructured 3.2 TEP mathematical model
using the following approach: formulation with BESS devices
Pbi (t) = Pbi (t)+ − Pbi (t)− ∀i ∈ ΩΓ . (5) Thus, taking into account the previous sections,
the mathematical model for the static transmis-
where the variables Pbi (t)− , Pbi (t)+ ≥ 0 are sion network expansion planning problem, using
auxiliary variables for power battery charge and the DC model with load shedding, battery energy
discharge. storage systems, and intraday time constraints
Thus, in (1) and (2) assuming Sbi = Sbi (t + presents the following format:
1) − Sbi (t), a unitary efficiency coefficient of the 
charge and discharge process in the battery, and   X  X X
min τl cij nij + α ric
also based on equation (5), the linear model to 
∀(i,j)∈Ωl c∈Ψ ∀i∈Ωb
represent the stored energy and the output power
)
in a battery presents the following format. X X X X Sc
+ τe ξi zic + ξp Pbci + ξw bi
µ
0 ≤ Sbi − Pb+i ∆t ≤ z1i (6) c∈Ψ i∈ΩΓ i∈ΩΓ i∈ΩΓ
(12)
0 ≤ Sbi + Pb−i ∆t ≤ (1 − z1i ) (7)
Subject to:
0 ≤ Pb+i ∆t ≤ (1 − z1i )Sbmax (8) X
i
Sf c + g c + rc − Pbci = dc ∀c ∈ Ψ (13)
0≤ Pb−i ∆t ≤ z1i Sbmax
i
(9) ∀i∈ΩΓ
c
X
c
zi ≤ z̄ (10) fij − γij (noij + ncij )(θic − θjc ) = 0 ∀(i, j) ∈ Ωl ,
i∈Γ

5
 ∀c ∈ Ψ (14) generator, and d is the demand in (p.u.) Kirch-
c c c hoff’s second law (voltage law) is represented by
| fij |≤ (noij + ncij )f ij ∀(i, j) ∈ Ωl ∀c ∈ Ψ
constraint (14), where γij is the susceptance of a
(15)
circuit in the right-of-way i − j in (p.u.), and θi
0 ≤ gic ≤ ḡic ∀i ∈ Ωb ∀c ∈ Ψ (16) is the angle phase in the bus i (rad). Constraint
c c (19) establishes the input power of each battery
0 ≤ ri ≤ di ∀i ∈ Ωb ∀c ∈ Ψ (17)
0 ≤ ncij ≤ n̄cij ∀(i, j) ∈ Ωl ∀c ∈ Ψ (18) in each demand scenario. Constraints (15-18) rep-
resent, respectively, power flow limits, generation
Pbci = Pb+c
i
− Pb−ci
∀i ∈ ΩΓ ∀c ∈ Ψ (19) limits, demand limits, and the maximum number
c c cmax of lines that should be added in the path i − j.
0 ≤ Sbi ≤ zi Sbi ∀i ∈ ΩΓ , ∀c ∈ Ψ (20)
Constraint (20)-(22), represent, respectively, the
0 ≤ Sbci − Pb+c c
∆t ≤ z1i ∀i ∈ ΩΓ , ∀c ∈ Ψ (21)
i limit of the storage level of each battery, the stor-
c −c c
0 ≤ Sbi + Pbi ∆t ≤ (1 − z1i ) ∀i ∈ ΩΓ , ∀c ∈Ψ age level if the battery is in state of charge, and
(22) the storage level if the battery is in state of dis-
0 ≤ Pb+c c
∆t ≤ (1 − z1i )Sbmax ∀i ∈ ΩΓ , ∀c ∈ Ψ charge. Particularly, it assumes that the minimum
i i
storage level is 0 whereas the maximum threshold
(23)
is the energy capacity of the battery.
0 ≤ Pb−c c max
∆t ≤ z1i Sbi ∀i ∈ ΩΓ , ∀c ∈ Ψ (24) Constraints (23) and (24) limit the charg-
X i
c c
zi ≤ z̄ ∀i ∈ ΩΓ ∀c ∈ Ψ (25) ing and discharging power of each battery. Con-
i∈ΩΓ
straint (25) represents the maximum number of
BESS devices. The decision variables for BESS
zi , z1i ∈ {0, 1} ∀i ∈ ΩΓ (26)
devices, number of circuits, and phase angle are
nij integer ∀(i, j) ∈ Ωl (27) represented by constraints (26-28). The variables
θi unbounded ∀i ∈ Ωb (28) indexed with c represent the expansion plan for
the c scenario. Finally, the sets Ωb , Ωl , ΩΓ , and
Equation (12) represents the objective func- Ψ represent, respectively, the set of all buses,
tion, where are added the fixed and variable transmission lines, buses with BESS devices, and
investment costs of the batteries. The fixed cost set of scenarios. It should be noted that in this
ξi is associated with the BESS investment deci- formulation to transform into a linear program-
sion (battery cost), the costs incurred only at ming problem (LP), the variables ncij and zic will
the time of generation are called power capacity be proposed by the specialized genetic algorithm
costs or variable costs ξp . The variables ξw , Sbi , presented in Section 4 for each scenario c.
and µ, represent unit energy capacity cost, total To obtain the annual equivalent costs, the
energy capacity, and cycle efficiency of the BESS capital costs of the transmission lines and BESS
devices, respectively. Variable costs change based devices in the objective function are converted
on the amount of energy stored by the batter- to annual values by multiplying by the annuity
ies. The objective function (12) with variables and factors [12]:
parameters cij , nij , zi , Pbi , α and ri , represent,
respectively, cost of a circuit added in the right-
of-way i − j (US$), number of new circuits added x(1 + x)y
τ= (29)
in right-of-way i − j, number of BESS devices in (1 + x)y − 1
the bus i, power flow injection of BESS devices in
the bus i, penalty parameter associated with load where x is the discount rate and y is the useful life
shedding (US$MW), with ri elements correspond- in years. The costs of transmission lines and BESS
ing to the artificial generation in bus i (MW). devices are very high, but their annual values are
τl and τe represent the lifespans of transmission lower due to their long lifespan.
lines and BESS devices. Constraint (13) repre-
sents Kirchhoff’s first law (current law), where S
is the incidence matrix, f power flow in the right-
of-way i − j, g is the generation, r is the artificial

6
4 Specialized genetic
algorithm
The meta-heuristic optimization algorithm based
on individual genetics was proposed in [32] with
the objective of solving widespread designation
problems. In this paper, the CBGA presented in
[25, 27] and [29] is used to solve the TEP problem
considering BESS devices. The CBGA procedures
are similar to Holland’s genetic algorithm [33],
but it has some differences that make it a more
efficient and competitive algorithm, solving very
complex problems with reduced computational
times. To employ the CBGA in the mathematical
model of the TEP problem in this work, the objec-
tive function is divided into two sub-functions,
such as the fitness function (circuits and BESS
devices costs) and the unfitness function (identi-
fies the unfeasibility of the individual, i.e., the load
shedding ri > 0).
Fig. 3 shows the CBGA procedure with BESS
devices. In this flowchart, it is initialized speci-
fying control parameters, such as: kps , ksr , kmr ,
kdr , k, kmax , which represent, respectively, the
population size, selection rate, mutation rate, dis-
tribution rate, the start of iterations, and the
maximum number of iterations. In this work, it is
worth mentioning that the control parameters for
both transmission lines and BESS devices are the
same.
The most important features of CBGA are
listed below:
4.1 Codification
In genetic algorithms, coding is very important
since they can be encoded by binary, integer,
or real numbers. Furthermore, proper coding can
lead to results in reduced computational time. The
coding carried out in this work is through integer
variables to represent the transmission lines, and
the coding of binary variables is used to represent
the BESS devices.
4.2 Initial population
According to the specialized literature, there are
two methods to initialize the CBGA population.
The first is random and the second is using a
constructive heuristic algorithm. For the initial
population of the CBGA of this work, the main
7
ideas of the algorithm presented in [25] is used,
i.e., the Villasana Garver constructive heuristic
algorithm is employed.
4.3 Selection
There are different selection methods for genetic
algorithms, such as roulette selection, tournament,
ranking, steady state, elitism, and Boltzmann [34].
In this paper, tournament selection is used. This
step consists of randomly selecting ks individuals
from the current population to create two groups.
Once the two groups are generated, they are sent
to a competition between individuals. This is done
with the objective of selecting the two best indi-
viduals from each group who will be named parent
1 and parent 2.
4.4 Recombination
This genetic operator allows the exchange of
genes or information among individuals. In gen-
eral, there are three types of recombination: the
first is through a single point, the second is
through multiple points, and the third uses the
uniform recombination method. In this paper, the
single-point method is used, whose objective is
to recombine the best-selected individuals in the
selection stage. Once the information of the two
individuals (parents) has been exchanged, they are
named offspring 1 and offspring 2.
4.5 Mutation
The mutation is a mechanism of the genetic
algorithm that allows the current population to
have greater diversity and prevents the algorithm
from remaining in local minima. In addition, the
mutation allows the creation of new qualities in
the individuals of the current population. There-
fore, the mutation process presented in this paper
is performed by adding, removing, or changing
features on individuals (transmission lines, trans-
formers, or BESS devices).
Note that selection, recombination, and muta-
tion processes are performed for both transmission
lines and BESS devices.
4.6 Local improvement of an
individual
After the mechanisms of selection, recombination,
and mutation, a new individual is available. This
new individual can be feasible or unfeasible (non-
zero load shedding). Therefore, since the objective
function of the CBGA is divided into the unfitness
function and a fitness function, local improvement
is made for both functions and they are described
as follows:
Fig. 3 Flowchart of CBGA with BESS devices.
4.6.1 Improving unfitness function
To improve the unfitness function and trans-
form the infeasible individual into feasible (load
8
shedding equal to zero) a constructive heuristic
algorithm (CHA) in [35] is used. In this CHA the
capacity limits of power flows of the circuits are
ignored and the DC mathematical model (13-18)
is executed to obtain the power flows in each right-
of-way. Once the power flows are determined,
transmission lines are added to the right-of-way
with the highest power flow (overload circuits).
This process is repeated until there is no more
overloaded right-of-way. Completing this process,
the individual becomes feasible and can present
circuits, so, the circuits are removed according to
the cost of each circuit.
4.6.2 Objective function improvement
After using the constructive heuristic, making
the individual feasible, and performing the selec-
tion, recombination, and mutation mechanisms; it
may be that the individual has unnecessary ele-
ments (transmission lines, transformers, or BESS
devices) causing a higher investment cost. There-
fore, at this stage, unnecessary elements are
removed according to the cost of the transmis-
sion lines and BESS devices without altering the
feasibility of the individual.
4.7 Population substitution
To carry out this process, the procedure intro-
duced in [36] is employed, where the individual
that aspires to be part of the current population
and replace another individual of the population,
must follow the acceptance criteria, such as: (1)
the individual must be different in kc characteris-
tics to each individual in the current population,
where kc is the diversity factor. This value is calcu-
lated using a diversity rate defined in the reference
[29]; and (2) if the fitness function of the offspring
is better quality than the fitness function of the
worst individual in the current population, then
the offspring replaces that individual.
4.8 Stop criteria
In the specialized literature, there are various
stopping criteria, such as the number of iterations,
when the incumbent does not improve for sev-
eral generations when the configurations are very
similar and there is practically no diversity of indi-
viduals in the populations. Therefore, this paper
opts for the number of iterations criterion or when
the objective function does not change during a are set to 30 and 15 years, respectively [38]. On
number of iterations. the other hand, the characteristics of the batter-
ies presented in Table 2 are taken from [12, 20],
5 Test and results which are: ξp = $500/KW, ξw = $3000/MWh,
µ = 75% and ξi are set to $1,000,000 to avoid deci-
This section presents the results obtained by the sions too small with BESS devices. It is assumed
CBGA considering BESS devices to solve the that charging and discharging efficiency coefficient
TEP problem. The methodology was successfully of the batteries is equal to 100% [22].
applied to 6-bus [26] and 93-bus electrical test sys-
tems [29]. All algorithms were implemented in the 5.1 Garver’s 6-bus test system
Matlab programming language using a personal
This system contains 5 nodes and 6 lines con-
computer with processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-
necting them, with 760 MW load and 1110 MW
1255U CPU @ 1.70 GHz with 16GB memory RAM
generation capacity; moreover, there is a sixth
and with the following CBGA control parameters
node, which initially is not connected to the rest of
kps = 50, ksr = 4, kmr = 10%, kdr = 2%, and
the system [27]. Two wind farms are assumed, one
α = 100.
in bus 3 and the other in bus 6. Wind farm gen-
erators vary according to the scenarios indicated
Table 1 Characteristics of each scenario in percent
of daily peak above. Three different cases have been tested:
TEP neglecting scenarios and BESS devices (case
Winter Summer
Sc Load Hour A), TEP considering only scenarios (case B), and
Wd We Wd We
1 LL 1:00-8:00 66.00 68.63 61.50 66.13 the complete expansion test that allows both sce-
2 HL 9:00-19:00 96.17 90.67 96.17 91.17
3 ML 20:00-24:00 77.50 88.50 86.00 90.25 narios and the placement of BESS devices (case
C).
In Table 5, the results for the Garver system
are presented, and Fig. 4a shows the results for
power flows and the optimal expansion in case A,
Table 2 Battery characteristics and Fig. 4b shows the optimal expansion solu-
System
Investment Operation Capacity Power tion considering scenarios and BESS devices in
cost $×106 cost ($/MWh) (MWh) (MW)
6-bus ξi = 1 ξw = 3000 Sb = 25 Pb = 10 the case C. From Table 5 and Fig. 4b, it can see
93-bus ξi = 1 ξw = 3000 Sb = 40 Pb = 10
that four lines are built with an initial invest-
ment cost of $100.00 million in case C. Using
It is assumed that the daily demand curve is the CBGA the following configuration was found:
variable for 24 hours and for each day the following n2−3 = 1, n2−6 = 2, n3−5 = 1, and one battery in
possible scenarios are established: three scenarios node 3 and other in node 5, both with an energy
for the weekdays and three scenarios for the week- capacity equal to 25MWh.
ends in winter and summer respectively. Table 1 Comparing case A and case B, it can be seen
summarizes the variable demand for each scenario. that the same investment cost was found in the
Furthermore, sub-scenarios are shown indicating lines. This is because the characteristics of each
light load, heavy load, and medium load, which are scenario do not affect the increase or reduction of
obtained through the arithmetic mean reported the cost, however, the computation time increases
in [37]. The placement of wind farms is based on when considering the winter and summer scenar-
factors such as demand, generation capacity, and ios, during the week and on weekends for light,
battery location. Wind farms assume variable gen- heavy and medium loads. Similarly, when com-
eration as follows: winter weekdays and weekends paring case B and case C, the computing time
(LL-50%, HL-100% and ML-85%) and summer increases, but the investment cost in transmission
weekdays and weekends (LL-55%, HL-100% and lines is reduced by $10 million. However, com-
ML-80%). paring the total cost of lines and batteries, the
To convert the capital costs to annual values, investment cost is reduced by only $1.79 million.
the discount rate x =10% is adopted, and the In Table 3, the results for power flows in case
lifespans of transmission lines and BESS devices C are reported. It can be seen that the power flow

9
 g1
BESS d5 d1
240 80 150
Bus 5 Bus 1
Bus 5 67.88 Bus 1

172.12
g3
312.12 New transmission
BESS line
40.90
38.79 Existing
Bus 3 transmission line
Bus 3 100 d3 d2 Wind turbine
40 240
Installed BESS
Bus 2 BESS
Bus 2 devices

99.09

297.88 Bus 6 Bus 4

Bus 6 Bus 4
d4
160
g6
297.88
a. Traditional b. Garver system considering
Garver system scenarios with BESS devices

Fig. 4 Optimal transmission expansion planning solution for cases A and C.

Table 3 Power flow for all lines considering BESS devices in the 12 scenarios for Garver system
Winter Summer Capacity

Weekdays (Wd) Weekends (We) Weekdays (Wd) Weekends (We) (MW)

Line Sc. 1 Sc. 2 Sc. 3 Sc. 4 Sc. 5 Sc. 6 Sc. 1 Sc.2 Sc. 3 Sc. 4 Sc.5 Sc. 6
1-2 0.34 -6.57 -3.69 0.47 -6.89 -5.81 1.91 -6.56 -5.03 0.29 -6.86 -3.16 100
1-4 42.38 58.92 48.13 42.19 55.27 54.32 40.13 58.92 53.03 42.44 55.60 56.49 80
1-5 54.49 20.71 43.56 54.84 29.08 30.69 58.76 20.71 33.21 54.37 28.32 24.47 100
2-3 -21.29 -132.31 -65.56 -19.84 -114.28 -105.49 -3.96 -132.31 -96.01 -21.77 -115.92 -107.67 100
2-4 63.23 94.94 75.87 62.81 89.80 87.28 58.28 94.94 84.58 63.36 90.26 87.90 100
2-6 -200 -200 -200 -200 -200 -200 -200 -200 -200 -200 -200 -200 100
3-5 128.91 -200 167.44 127.66 200 190.11 113.84 200 182.59 129.33 200 169.24 100

Table 4 Charge and discharge of BESS devices in the 12 scenarios for Garver system
Winter Summer Capacity

Weekdays (Wd) Weekends (We) Weekdays (Wd) Weekends (We) (MWh)

Bus Sc. 1 Sc. 2 Sc. 3 Sc. 4 Sc. 5 Sc. 6 Sc. 1 Sc.2 Sc. 3 Sc. 4 Sc.5 Sc. 6
3 0 10.78 0 0 0 25 0 10.78 25 0 0 25 25
5 -25 10.09 -25 -25 -11.48 -8.4 -25 10.09 -9.4 -25 -9.52 22.9 25

in the right-of-way 2-6 is used at maximum capac- 88.5% and 90.17% of the total value of the sys-
ity in the twelve scenarios. In addition, line 3-5 tem and the generation operates at 100%. But in
is used at maximum capacity in scenarios 2-Wd, the medium load scenario for the summer in WE,
and 5-We in winter and summer. Furthermore, the the battery is being discharged because the renew-
increase in power flow can be observed by consid- able generation only works at 80%. It should be
ering the heavy load scenario in Wd and We for noted that values with a positive sign mean that
winter and summer. the battery is in state of discharge (behaves like a
The results of charge and discharge of the generator), and with a negative sign means that
BESS devices allocated in nodes 3 and 5 for 12 the battery is in state of charge (behaves like a
scenarios are present in Table 4, it can be observed demand).
that in heavy load the batteries are discharged
and in light load, the batteries are charged, which 5.2 93-bus electrical test system
indicates a typical behavior of the batteries. Pay
attention to Table 4 for the winter and summer The electrical test system is a configuration of the
scenarios in We, the battery is charging because Colombian system with 93 buses, 193 transmission
in that period it has demand that varies between lines as base topology, 155 candidate branches,

10
 81 New transmission
line
49 53 46
48 63
45 Existing transmission
47 52 51 line

50 Wind turbine
54
56 BESS Installed BESS
88
devices
57 84
43

55 42
17 37 40 41
15 12 86 68
24
76 61 39
21 18 58
75 38
19
20 22
23 82
16 62 66
13
14 60 67
69
32
31 34 70

33
73
72 8 59
85 9
30 4 2 83 77 79
65
74
36
64
5 87
29
71 93
89 1
25 78
27 35 6 10
BESS 3
7
90
28 BESS 91

26
80
11
44 92

Fig. 5 Optimal transmission expansion planning solution considering scenarios and BESS devices for 93-bus system.

Table 5 Results of the expansion for the Garver Considering BESS devices with the data in
system
Table 1 (case C), it was found the following topol-
Description
Number of new lines
Case A
4
Case B
4
Case C
4
ogy: n43−88 = 1, n55−57 = 1, n55−84 = 1, n56−57 =
Number of added batteries
Initial line
- - 2 1, n55−62 = 1, n18−21 = 1, n27−29 = 1, n29−64 = 1,
110 110 100
investment, M$
Annual line cost, M$ 11.67 11.67 10.61
n50−54 = 1, n62−73 = 1, n54−56 = 1, n72−73 = 1,
Initial BESS
Investment, M$
- - 8.21 n19−82 = 2, n82−85 = 1, n68−86 = 1, and optimal
Annual BESS cost
Total investment, M$
-
110
-
110
1.08
108.21
allocation of BESS devices in bus 25 and 80 as
Time (seg.) 1.13 7.16 15.87 show in Fig. 5. The computational time required
was 5.57 min. with 20,420 linear programming
demand, and generation both equal to 14,559 problems solve (LP). In Fig. 5 it can be seen
MW, and a maximum possible number of added that 16 circuits are added with the initial invest-
lines per branch equal to 4 [29]. One existing non- ment cost of the circuit and BESS devices equal to
dispatchable renewable generation (wind farm) is US$500.79×106 and US$10.77×106 , respectively.
assumed at buses 25 and 67. The optimal solution The annual investment cost of the circuit is equal
to the planning problem without BESS devices to US$53.12×106 , and of the BESS devices is
has an investment cost equal to US$560.00×106 equal to US$1.42×106 . Therefore, there is a cost
(case A and case B) with load shedding equal to decreases when the batteries are considered, i.e.,
0.38MW as reported in [29].

11
 BESS devices Wind Farms
only US$507.95×106 are needed to satisfy the Winter Weekdays Winter Weekends
100 100
electrical demand.
The charge and discharge of the battery can 50 50

MW

MW
be monitored by analyzing bus 25, where a vari-
0 0
able generation (wind farm) and a BESS device
are located. Fig. 6 shows the charge and discharge -50 -50
1 5 8 13 19 24 1 5 8 13 19 24
of BESS device. Scenarios 1 (1-8hrs), 2 (8-19hrs), Hour Hour
and 3 (19-24hrs), represent LL, HL, and ML for 100
Summer Weekdays
100
Summer Weekends

weekdays and weekends in winter and summer

50 50
(total scenarios = 12). In addition, Fig. 6 shows

MW

MW
that the battery for the 4 sub-figures in LL sce- 0 0
nario is being charged, while in HL scenario for
weekdays in winter and summer, the battery is -50
1 5 8 13 19 24
-50
1 5 8 13 19 24
discharging. However, for weekends in winter and Hour Hour

summer, the battery is in a state of resting. In

ML scenario for weekdays in winter and summer Fig. 6 Charged and discharged of BESS devices located
the battery is being charged, while the winter and in bus 25 for the winter and summer scenarios.
summer weekends are being discharged.
Fig. 7 shows the variable generation and Wind Farms Demand
Winter Weekdays Winter Weekends
demand levels in bus 67 in LL, HL and ML sce- 500 500

narios for weekdays and weekends in winter and

400 400
summer. On weekdays and weekends in winter
MW

MW
for LL scenario the variable generation is less 300 300

than demand. However, the variable generation is

200 200
greater than the demand in HL scenario. 1 5 8 13 19 24 1 5 8 13 19 24
Hour Hour
Fig. 8 shows BESS devices and demand levels Summer Weekdays Summer Weekends
500 500
in bus 80 for the winter and summer on week-
450
days and weekends in LL, HL, and ML scenarios, 400
400
MW

MW
respectively. The battery is being charged in the
350
LL, and is being discharged in HL, ML scenarios. 300
300
Moreover, it should also be noted that the Figs. 6, 200
7 and 8 have the format of the Fig. 1 to represent 1 5 8 13
Hour
19 24 1 5 8 13
Hour
19 24

the generation scenarios in transmission network

expansion planning.
Based on Fig. 6 and Fig. 8 the charging/dis-
charging of BESS devices is consistent with wind
farms and load variations which facilitate the
interaction with the non-dispatchable renewable
generation, reducing investment cost in planning
decisions.
It is noteworthy that in this work, BESS
devices are introduced analogously to the inte-
gration of renewable generation units for the
transmission upgrade deferral. This deferral in
the transmission line adds favorable flexibility to
future investment decisions, because long-term
uncertainties may make the current optimal plan
no longer the best option in the future. Further-
more, the new transmission lines are expected to
strengthen the grid structure and alleviate trans-
mission congestions, particularly in systems that
Fig. 7 Variable generation and demand levels in bus 67
for the winter and summer scenarios..
have a significant percentage of renewable energy
sources and distributed generators, in which BESS
devices or other forms of energy storage systems
are more likely to be implemented for ancillary
services, in order to address uncertainties and
improve power quality and reliability.
6 Conclusion
This paper introduced a new formulation for the
transmission expansion planning problem, consid-
ering energy scenarios and typical days behavior,
to represent the intraday constraints introduced
by considering battery energy storage systems

12
 BESS devices
Winter Weekdays
100 100
50 50
MW
MW
0 0
-50 -50
1 5 8 13 19 24 1 5
Hour
Summer Weekdays
100 100
50 50
MW
MW
0 0
-50 -50
1 5 8 13 19 24 1 5
Hour
Fig. 8 BESS devices and demand levels in bus 80 for the
winter and summer scenarios.
and its interaction with variable energy sources.
This formulation allows to assess the influence
of batteries to defer the construction of trans-
mission lines and reduce investment costs. The
formulated optimization problem is solved using
a specialized genetic algorithm. The proposed for-
mulation and solution method was assessed using
6-bus and 93-bus electrical systems and employing
costs for network components and storage systems
obtained from the literature. The obtained results
showed an adequate computational performance
of the formulation and solution method and indi-
cate the cost advantage of using the energy storage
system.
In the context of batteries or any other energy
storage system, the outcomes of this study indi-
cate that the battery’s behavior can be assessed
in relation to variable generation and variable
demand within the TEP problem. Specifically,
during light load periods, the battery is in a state
of charge, whereas during heavy loads, it is in a
state of discharge. This process exemplifies the
typical behavior of batteries in the real world.
Author contributions Conceptualization of this study,
methodology, software, data curation, investigation, and
writing-original draft preparation was contributed by DH;
supervision, visualization, project administration, writing
(editing) was contributed by DF. All authors have read and
agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding This research was supported in part by Coordenação
de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nı́vel Superior (CAPES)
under Grant 001, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento
Cientı́fico (CNPq) under the grants 04068/2020-0, Fundação
de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG)
Demand
Winter Weekends under the grant APG-03609-17, and Instituto Nacional de
Energia Elétrica (INERGE).
Declarations
Conflict of interest The authors declare no conflict of inter-
est. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the
8 13 19 24
Hour collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of
Summer Weekends the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.
References
[1] A.Z.A. Shaqsi, K. Sopian, A. Al-Hinai,
Review of energy storage services, appli-
8 13 19 24
Hour cations, limitations, and benefits. Energy
Reports 6, 288–306 (2020). https://doi.org/
doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2020.07.028
[2] M. Mahdavi, C. Sabillon Antunez, M. Ajalli,
R. Romero, Transmission expansion plan-
ning: Literature review and classification.
IEEE Systems Journal 13(3), 3129–3140
(2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.
2018.2871793
[3] E. Asada, E. Carreno, R. Romero, A. Garcia,
in IEEE Power Engineering Society General
Meeting, 2005 (2005), pp. 171–176 Vol. 1.
https://doi.org/10.1109/PES.2005.1489071
[4] S. Dehghan, H. Saboori, A. Kazemi, S. Jadid,
in 2010 18th Iranian Conference on Electrical
Engineering (IEEE, 2010), pp. 955–960
[5] Z. Wu, X. Du, W. Gu, X.P. Zhang, J. Li,
Automatic selection method for candidate
lines in transmission expansion planning.
IEEE Access 6, 11605–11613 (2018). https:
//doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2798063
[6] S. Manrique, A.A. Kida, A. Alvarez, L. Gal-
lego, in Simposio brazileiro (2015)
[7] R. Gallego, A. Monticelli, R. Romero,
Transmision system expansion planning by
an extended genetic algorithm. IEE
Proceedings-Generation, Transmission and
Distribution 145(3), 329–335 (1998)
[8] R. Romero, R. Gallego, A. Monticelli, in Pro-
ceedings of Power Industry Computer Appli-
cations Conference (IEEE, 1995), pp. 278–
283
13
 [9] N. Leeprechanon, P. Limsakul, S. Pothiya,
Optimal transmission expansion planning
using ant colony optimization. Journal of Sus-
tainable Energy & Environment 1(2), 71–76
(2010)
[10] P. Butler, J. Iannucci, J. Eyer, S.N. Labora-
tories, U.S.D. of Energy. Office of Scientific,
T. Information, Estimating Electricity Stor-
age Power Rating and Discharge Duration for
Utility Transmission and Distribution Defer-
ral: A Study for the DOE Energy Storage Pro-
gram (United States. Department of Energy,
2005)
[11] Z. Hu, F. Zhang, B. Li, in 2012 IEEE power
and energy society general meeting (IEEE,
2012), pp. 1–6
[12] F. Zhang, Z. Hu, Y. Song, Mixed-integer
linear model for transmission expansion plan-
ning with line losses and energy storage
systems. Generation, Transmission & Distri-
bution, IET 7, 919–928 (2013). https://doi.
org/10.1049/iet-gtd.2012.0666
[13] V. Krishnan, T. Das, Optimal allocation of
energy storage in a co-optimized electric-
ity market: Benefits assessment and deriv-
ing indicators for economic storage ventures.
Energy 81, 175–188 (2015). https://doi.org/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.12.016
[14] H. Mazaheri, A. Abbaspour, M. Fotuhi-
Firuzabad, H. Farzin, M. Moeini-Aghtaie, in
2017 Iranian Conference on Electrical Engi-
neering (ICEE) (IEEE, 2017), pp. 1199–1203
[15] C. Bustos, E. Sauma, S. de la Torre, J.A.
Aguado, J. Contreras, D. Pozo, Energy stor-
age and transmission expansion planning:
substitutes or complements? IET Gener-
ation, Transmission & Distribution 12(8),
1738–1746 (2018). https://doi.org/https://
doi.org/10.1049/iet-gtd.2017.0997
[16] I.C. Gonzalez-Romero, S. Wogrin, T. Gomez,
Proactive transmission expansion planning
with storage considerations. Energy Strategy
Reviews 24, 154–165 (2019)
14
[17] M.R. Ansari, S. Pirouzi, M. Kazemi,
A. Naderipour, M. Benbouzid, Renewable
generation and transmission expansion plan-
ning coordination with energy storage sys-
tem: A flexibility point of view. Applied
Sciences 11(8) (2021). https://doi.org/10.
3390/app11083303
[18] C. MacRae, M. Ozlen, A. Ernst, in 2014
IEEE International Autumn Meeting on
Power, Electronics and Computing (ROPEC)
(IEEE, 2014), pp. 1–5
[19] C. MacRae, A. Ernst, M. Ozlen, A ben-
ders decomposition approach to transmission
expansion planning considering energy stor-
age. Energy 112, 795–803 (2016)
[20] C.A. Mora, O.D. Montoya, E.R. Trujillo,
Mixed-integer programming model for trans-
mission network expansion planning with
battery energy storage systems (bess). Ener-
gies 13(17), 4386 (2020)
[21] Z. Luburić, H. Pandžić, M. Carrión, Trans-
mission expansion planning model consider-
ing battery energy storage, tcsc and lines
using ac opf. IEEE Access 8, 203429–203439
(2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.
2020.3036381
[22] J. Aguado, S. de la Torre, A. Triviño, Bat-
tery energy storage systems in transmis-
sion network expansion planning. Elec-
tric Power Systems Research 145, 63–72
(2017). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.epsr.2016.11.012
[23] M. Kazemi, M.R. Ansari, An integrated
transmission expansion planning and battery
storage systems placement-a security and
reliability perspective. International Journal
of Electrical Power & Energy Systems 134,
107329 (2022)
[24] A. Abdelaziz, in ICECS 2000. 7th IEEE
International Conference on Electronics, Cir-
cuits and Systems (Cat. No.00EX445), vol. 2
(2000), pp. 642–645 vol.2. https://doi.org/
10.1109/ICECS.2000.912959
[25] D. Huamannahui Huanca, L.A. Gal-
lego Pareja, Chu and beasley genetic
algorithm to solve the transmission network
expansion planning problem considering
active power losses. IEEE Latin Amer-
ica Transactions 19(11), 1967–1975 (2021).
https://doi.org/10.1109/TLA.2021.9475851
Press, Ann Arbor, MI, 1975). Second edition,
1992
[34] S. Deepa, Principles of soft computing
(with CD) (Wiley India Pvt. Limited,
2007). https://doi.org/https://books.google.
com.br/books?id=CXruGgP0BTIC

[26] I. Silva, M. Rider, R. Romero, C. Murari, in [35] R. Villasana, L. Garver, S. Salon, Transmis-
2006 IEEE Power Engineering Society Gen- sion network planning using linear program-
eral Meeting (2006), pp. 7 pp.–. https://doi. ming. IEEE transactions on power apparatus
org/10.1109/PES.2006.1709172 and systems 2, 349–356 (1985)

[27] I.d.J. Silva, M.J. Rider, R. Romero, C.A. [36] D.H. Huanca, L.A. Gallego, J.M.
Murari, Transmission network expansion López-Lezama, Transmission network
planning considering uncertainty in demand. expansion planning considering opti-
IEEE transactions on Power Systems 21(4), mal allocation of series capacitive
1565–1573 (2006) compensation and active power losses.
Applied Sciences 12(1), 388 (2021).
[28] A.H. Domı́nguez, A. Escobar Z., R.A. Gal- https://doi.org/10.3390/app12010388
lego, in 2014 IEEE PES Transmission &
Distribution Conference and Exposition - [37] P.M. Subcommittee, Ieee reliability test sys-
Latin America (PES T&D-LA) (2014), pp. tem. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus
1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/TDC-LA.2014. and Systems PAS-98(6), 2047–2054 (1979).
6955197 https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAS.1979.319398

[29] L. Gallego, L. Garcés, M. Rahmani, [38] M. Beaudin, H. Zareipour, A. Schellenber-

R. Romero, High-performance hybrid
algorithm to solve transmission network
expansion planning. IET Generation,
Transmission & Distribution 11 (2016).
https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-gtd.2016.0511
glabe, W. Rosehart, Energy storage for miti-
gating the variability of renewable electricity
sources: An updated review. Energy for sus-
tainable development 14(4), 302–314 (2010)

[30] C.A.C. Florez, R.A.B. Ocampo, A.H.E. Zulu-

aga, Multi-objective transmission expansion
planning considering multiple generation sce-
narios. International Journal of Electrical
Power & Energy Systems 62, 398–409 (2014)

[31] A. Soares, R. Perez, F. Thome, Optimal gen-

eration and transmission expansion planning
addressing short-term constraints with co-
optimization of energy and reserves. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1910.00446 (2019)

[32] P.C. Chu, J.E. Beasley, A genetic algorithm

for the generalised assignment problem. Com-
puters & Operations Research 24(1), 17–23
(1997)

[33] J.H. Holland, Adaptation in Natural and

Artificial Systems (University of Michigan

15