Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
With the rapid growth of wind and solar generation, power systems face increasing balancing and energy storage needs. Cross-regional interconnection provides spatial flexibility through tie-line power exchange, yet the implications of tie-line scheduling flexibility for capacity planning remain insufficiently understood. This paper uses the Gansu–Shandong–Zhejiang interconnected system in China to quantify how tie-line scheduling timescales affect storage requirements for bulk energy shifting and system balancing. Within a common capacity planning and dispatch optimization framework, three stylized tie-line scheduling strategies are compared: Daily Fixed, Monthly Fixed, and Annual Fixed, representing decreasing levels of scheduling flexibility. Results show that greater tie-line scheduling flexibility changes the optimal capacity configuration, particularly the required battery energy storage (BES) capacity. Compared with Annual Fixed, Daily Fixed reduces BES capacity additions by 59.2% and total system cost by 22.8%. Sensitivity analyses further show that this advantage remains robust to variations in storage parameters and tie-line capacity. These findings indicate that the planning value of cross-regional interconnection depends substantially on its operational flexibility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: