Advanced

Transmission
Technologies

December 2020

United States Department of Energy

Washington, DC 20585
Executive Summary
The high-voltage transmission electric grid is a complex, interconnected, and interdependent
system that is responsible for providing safe, reliable, and cost-effective electricity to
customers. In the United States, the transmission system is comprised of three distinct power
grids, or “interconnections”: the Eastern Interconnection, the Western Interconnection, and a
smaller grid containing most of Texas. The three systems have weak ties between them to act
as power transfers, but they largely rely on independent systems to remain stable and reliable.
Along with aged assets, primarily from the 1960s and 1970s, the electric power system is
evolving, from consisting of predominantly reliable, dependable, and variable-output
generation sources (e.g., coal, natural gas, and hydroelectric) to increasing percentages of
climate- and weather- dependent intermittent power generation sources (e.g., wind and solar).
All of these generation sources rely heavily on high-voltage transmission lines, substations, and
the distribution grid to bring electric power to the customers.

The original vertically-integrated system design was simple, following the path of generation to
transmission to distribution to customer. The centralized control paradigm in which generation
is dispatched to serve variable customer demands is being challenged with greater deployment
of distributed energy resources (at both the transmission and distribution level), which may not
follow the traditional path mentioned above. This means an electricity customer today could
be a generation source tomorrow if wind or solar assets were on their privately-owned
property. The fact that customers can now be power sources means that they do not have to
wholly rely on their utility to serve their needs and they could sell power back to the utility.
However, the utility still has to maintain the electric infrastructure to the customer if the utility
and associated the privately-owned generation cannot produce enough power to meet
required load. This results in added utility expenditures without any further customer revenue,
though with the benefit that the arrangement contributes to grid resilience and customer
safety when the utility manages an outage caused by extreme weather or another issue.

The increasing adoption of electric vehicles is also introducing electric demand growth. Since
electric vehicle (EV) charging demands are mobile, there is increased variability as to where on
the electric system the demand may appear in real time. Meeting this EV need is a unique
challenge to system designers and operators of the electric grid to manage real-time
operations, system growth, and infrastructure improvements. These broad system changes
have created a need for advanced solutions to help solve modern operational challenges and to
address the limitations and risks associated with aged infrastructure.

The transmission system in operation today is the backbone of the electricity delivery system
that connects all grid resources and acts as the path for electricity to flow from generation to
demand. Advanced transmission technologies, coupled with advanced computational and
advanced dynamic situational awareness, are a suite of tools that can help address transmission
challenges, improving the efficiency and effectiveness of electricity delivery and increasing the
reliability and resilience of the system.
 Department of Energy | December 2020

Other technologies, such as energy storage, microgrids, and distributed controls, can also help
support the overall objectives of the electric power system. Underpinning the various grid
challenges is the fundamental need to perform real-time balancing of generator outputs to
meet demand—at all times and across all regions—within the limits and capabilities of the
underlying hardware. Enhanced planning and optimization methods can help minimize
operating costs, while new hardware capabilities can help move more power by upgrading
existing line materials using existing transmission pathways. These new capabilities become
more critical with a growing number of evolving threats from cyber-attacks and extreme
weather events, among others.

Notably, enhanced security against cyber-attacks has become a priority for DOE in recent years.
In 2020, DOE released a Request for Information (RFI) to better understand the current state
and gaps in supply chain risk management, as intelligent electronics made abroad may be
compromised by adversaries. As cyber and foreign threats increase and evolve, it is especially
important that DOE is aware of and properly prioritizes defending against these risks to
maintain a reliable grid for all customers.

Several advanced transmission technologies can be used to improve and enhance the
transmission system, spanning both grid software and grid hardware. Sensor and software
solutions (e.g., dynamic line rating, topology optimization) focus on improvements in the
control center, control and protection systems, advanced optical sensing and metering tools,
real-time contingency analysis tools, and artificial intelligence-assisted operator decision-
making processes. These technologies generally improve upon a short-term system outlook,
such as day-ahead or real-time applications, rather than a longer-term planning horizon.
Actuator and hardware solutions (e.g., power flow controllers, advanced conductors, and
cables) focus on improvements in the physical assets and infrastructure responsible for
carrying, converting, or controlling electricity. These technologies are generally more capital-
intensive than sensor and software solutions and improve the long-term reliability and
resilience of the grid. This suite of technologies can be used in isolation or in tandem to
improve the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the transmission network. Additionally,
these technologies can help increase the reliability and resilience of the entire electric power
system. Finally, they can also assist the designers to envision and create the system of the
future that can rapidly adapt and change as the demand and use cases for electricity evolve.

Advanced transmission technologies are diverse in maturity, application, and capabilities.

These technologies all possess different capabilities that present opportunities to improve the
transmission system, but they also face unique barriers. Selecting the optimal set of
technologies for a given situation will require assessments that can evaluate advanced
transmission technologies against one another, as well as against traditional solutions.
Although direct economic benefits can be apparent, other benefits are harder to quantify, such
as improved situational awareness, asset deferral, and improved resilience. A robust
framework and methodology, along with associated modeling and simulation tools, are needed
to support this determination.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page ii

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Despite the potential benefits offered by these advanced transmission technologies, several
broad issues impede their integration and adoption. Ensuring safety of utility personnel when
working on equipment, market readiness, market design issues, insufficient incentives,
misalignment of incentives, utility risk aversion due to traditional liability issues, operator
training to achieve proficiency, planning limitations, incumbency issues, third party operation of
equipment, and mitigation of cybersecurity concerns are all challenges that require
nontechnical solutions and new approaches by utilities, grid operators, and regulators. In most
cases, cost reductions and proven field performance are requirements for broader deployment.
The U.S. Department of Energy, working in concert with the private sector and research
institutions, can support education, research, development, and demonstration efforts to
address these barriers and concerns. Success in these endeavors can accelerate
commercialization of products that will see growing markets worldwide. Investing in advanced
transmission technologies presents opportunities for U.S. leadership and domestic
manufacturing, especially with grid hardware and computational technologies.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page iii

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Abbreviations
AAAC All Aluminum Alloy Conductor
AAR ambient adjusted ratings
AC alternating current
ACAR Aluminum Conductor Alloy Reinforced
ACCC Aluminum Conductor Composite Core
ACCR Aluminum Conductor Composite Reinforced
ACFR Aluminum Conductor Carbon Fiber Reinforced
ACSR Aluminum Conductor Steel Reinforced
ACSS Aluminum Conductor Steel Supported
AOHC advanced overhead conductors
ASEA Allmänna Svenska Elektriska Aktiebolaget
BSCCO bismuth strontium calcium copper oxygen
CAISO California Independent System Operator
CFE Comisión Federal de Electricidad
CIGRE International Council on Large Electric Systems
CMP Constraint Management Plans
DER distributed energy resources
DLR dynamic line rating
DOE Department of Energy
DSR distributed series reactor
EMS Energy Management System
ERCOT Electricity Reliability Council of Texas
FACTS flexible AC transmission systems
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
FTR Financial Transmission Rights
GENI Green Electricity Network Integration
GW gigawatt
HVAC High-Voltage Alternating Current
HTLS high-temperature, low-sag
HTS high-temperature superconductor
HVDC High-Voltage Direct Current
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
IEEE Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers
ISO Independent System Operator
LADWP Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
MI mass impregnated
MISO Midcontinent Independent System Operator
MTDC Multi-terminal HVDC
MVDC Medium Voltage Direct Current
MW megawatt

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page iv

 Department of Energy | December 2020

NERC North American Electric Reliability Corporation

NYISO New York Independent System Operator
NYPA New York Power Authority
O&M operations and maintenance
PAC phase angle controllers
PAR phase angle regulators
PFC power flow controllers
PJM PJM Interconnection LLC
PST phase-shifting transformers
RAS Remedial Action Schemes
ReBCO Rare Earth–Barium–Copper Oxide
REG Resilient Electric Grid
ROW rights-of-way
RTO regional transmission organization
SCADA supervisory control and data acquisition
SLR seasonal line ratings
SPP Southwest Power Pool
SPS Special Protection Schemes
SSPS Solid State Power Substation
SSSC Static Series Synchronous Compensator
STATCOM Static Synchronous Compensator
SVC Static Var Compensators
TACSR Thermal-Resistant Aluminum Alloy Conductor Steel Reinforced
TCSC Thyristor-Controlled Series Capacitor
UHVDC ultra-high-voltage direct current
UPFC Unified Power Flow Controller
WAPA Western Area Power Administration
XLPE cross-linked polyethylene

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page v

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Advanced Transmission Technologies

Table of Contents
II. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1
Electric Grid Challenges .................................................................................................... 2
Advanced Transmission Technologies.............................................................................. 5
III. Sensors and Software Solutions .......................................................................................... 6
Dynamic Line Rating ......................................................................................................... 6
Opportunities............................................................................................................... 7
Specific Barriers ........................................................................................................... 9
Topology Optimization ................................................................................................... 11
Opportunities........................................................................................................... 122
Specific Barriers ....................................................................................................... 144
IV. Actuators and Hardware Solutions .................................................................................... 16
Power Flow Controllers: Alternating Current Technologies.......................................... 16
Opportunities............................................................................................................. 17
Specific Barriers ......................................................................................................... 19
Power Flow Controllers: Direct Current Technologies .................................................. 21
Opportunities........................................................................................................... 233
Specific Barriers ....................................................................................................... 244
Advanced Conductors and Cables .................................................................................. 25
Opportunities............................................................................................................. 26
Specific Barriers ......................................................................................................... 27
V. Integration and Adoption Challenges ................................................................................ 28
VI. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 322
VII. Appendix .......................................................................................................................... 344
VIII. Bibliography ....................................................................................................................... 48

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page vi

 Department of Energy | December 2020

II. Introduction
The high-voltage transmission electric grid is a complex interconnected and interdependent
system that is responsible for providing safe, reliable, and cost-effective electricity to
customers. Developed and built over the last 125 years, the U.S. electric power system has
been called the “world’s largest machine and part of the greatest engineering achievement of
the 20th century” [1]. The electric transmission and distribution infrastructure and the energy
delivery it facilitates represent an essential fabric of the modern economy, for both comfort
and safety of customers. Whether the grid is powering manufacturing, essential health
services, sanitation needs, or providing energy to the systems that support modern
communication machinery, the presence of such is noticeable instantly during a sudden failure.

Recently, investments in the grid have focused on improving reliability, efficiency, and
resilience to meet the growing dependence on electricity across all sectors. This is a
complicated task in which generation and use must be balanced continuously, the ability to
store electricity cost-effectively is limited, and energy consumption patterns are ever-changing.

To serve customer expectations of continuous access to electricity, a collection of generators,

towers, wires, transformers, switches, and poles were erected and stitched together. The U.S.
electric power system is typically divided into the categories of generation, transmission,
distribution, and end-use.
In addition to the physical infrastructure, a centralized control paradigm was developed in
which large remote generators are coordinated and dispatched to support the reliable delivery
of electricity to end-users through a vast network of high-voltage transmission lines and lower-
voltage distribution systems. System operators have been tasked with the dispatch of
generators to meet all dynamic demands while ensuring reliability and minimizing costs, a
process known as security-constrained economic dispatch.

Parts of the electric grid are more than a century old, and 70 percent of the transmission lines
and large power transformers are more than 25 years old [2], [3]. Along with aged assets, the
electric power system is evolving from one consisting predominantly of dispatchable generation
sources (e.g. coal, natural gas, and hydroelectric) to one having increasing percentages of
variable generation sources (e.g., wind and solar). The penetration of variable and intermittent
generation varies widely across the United States, as does the ability of the regional grids to
accommodate them. Additionally, the centralized control paradigm in which generation is
dispatched to serve variable customer demand is being challenged with greater deployment of
distributed energy resources (DERs). The increasing adoption of electric vehicles will also
introduce demand growth on variable locations across the grid. These broad system changes
have created a need for advanced solutions to help solve modern operational challenges and
address the limitations and risks associated with aged infrastructure.

Ultimately, the goal of the electric grid is to deliver safe, reliable, and cost-effective electric
power. For each part of the system, there are numerous tools, technologies, and approaches to

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 1

 Department of Energy | December 2020

help accomplish this goal. In the distribution system, vegetation management and distribution
automation are used to prevent and recover from interruptions. In the transmission system, a
variety of contingencies are analyzed and planned for while phasor measurement units provide
wide-area situational awareness. Advanced transmission technologies (e.g., dynamic line
rating, transmission monitoring, topology optimization, power flow controllers) are a suite of
tools that can help address transmission challenges from an evolving grid, improving the
efficiency and effectiveness of electricity delivery, and increasing the reliability and resilience of
the system. Other technologies, such as energy storage, microgrids, and distributed controls,
can also help support the overall objectives of the electric power system.

Electric Grid Challenges

The U.S. electric grid contains more than 642,000 miles of high-voltage transmission lines and
roughly 6.3 million miles of local distribution lines that operate within a patchwork of federal,
state, tribal, and local regulatory jurisdictions [4]. The reliability of the bulk-power system (i.e.,
the facilities and control systems necessary for operating an interconnected electric
transmission network and the electric generation facilities needed to maintain system
reliability) generally falls under the purview of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) and the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), which develop, issue,
and enforce mandatory reliability standards [5].

Several professional organizations, such as the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers
(IEEE), International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), and the International Council on Large
Electric Systems (CIGRE), also issue guidelines and technical standards. These various standards
provide the basis for the bulk-power system that is key to ensuring the safe and reliable
delivery of electricity. However, these standards also result in constraints on the power system
that might be slow to adapt to changing conditions.

Several key electric grid challenges affecting transmission systems today include:

Limited transmission capacity. The physics of the power system and underlying material
properties restricts the maximum delivery capacity or “demand ability” of a transmission line by
a thermal limit, a voltage limit, and a stability limit. Thermal limits are set to ensure
transmission lines do not sag excessively or burn in an underground pipe type system and are
determined by the conductor temperature limit. Voltage limits are set to maintain that voltage
drops across the length of a line are not overly excessive (less than five percent) and are
generally influenced by the reactance of the conductor. Stability limits are set to provide a
safety margin (30 percent of maximum power) to ensure that the system remains stable during
gradual changes and contingencies and are influenced by the impedance of the line. Generally,
the load-carrying ability or ratings of short transmission lines (less than 50 miles) are thermally
limited, medium-length lines (between 50 and 200 miles) are voltage limited, and long lines
(over 200 miles) are stability limited.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 2

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Traditional solutions to increasing transmission capacity include expanding, upgrading, or

rebuilding the electric infrastructure. Investments in transmission expansion projects in the
United States have increased in value every year since 2014 and totaled over $20 billion in 2016
[6]. Because most transmission infrastructure was built between the 1960s and the 1980s,
these investments are needed to sustain grid reliability as the assets age. One estimate
projects that transmission replacement costs alone will increase by $1.2–$3.2 billion per year
over the next ten years, assuming facilities need to be replaced after 60 to 80 years of
operation [7]. Additionally, line re-conductors with high temperature, low sag conductors,
which can be used in some situations to increase capacity on existing transmission rights-of-
way (ROW), can cost from $1 million to $8 million per mile depending on the voltage class of
the line [8].

System congestion. If a transmission system component, such as an overhead line or a

substation, is operating at its physical limit (as discussed above), system operators may choose
to run a more expensive generator on the downstream side over a less expensive one on the
upstream side to de-load the components by injecting power on the downstream of the power
flow and meet safety and system reliability standards. The events and costs associated with the
suboptimal commitment and dispatch of generators are known as congestion [9]. Grid
operators attempt to mitigate congestion by forecasting demand and generator availability in
the short term (e.g., through day-ahead and hour-ahead markets), planning around
maintenance schedules and line outages in the mid-term, and identifying system needs in the
long term (e.g., through multiyear resource, transmission, and distribution planning).
Congestion costs can be quite substantial; between 2009 and 2017, California ratepayers’ bills
included $683.5 million in congestion-related costs [10]. According to a 2018 U.S. Department
of Energy report, the sum of real-time congestion costs for 2016 among major system
operators—specifically, the California Independent System Operator (CAISO), the Electric
Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), Independent System Operator New England (ISO-NE),
Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), the New York Independent System
Operator (NYISO), and PJM—was $4.8 billion [11].

Increased variability and uncertainty. The demand for electricity changes by the minute, hour,
day of the week, and season with times of peak demand varying by region. Generally,
economic activity drives these variations (e.g., residential demand drops during work hours,
commercial or industrial demand decreases on non-office hours or weekends) but is
augmented by weather, seasonal, and regional factors. In hot climates, home air-conditioning
usage increases the overall demand in the late afternoons during the hottest part of the year.
In cold climates, home heating using electricity increases in mid-mornings and mid-evenings
during the coldest part of the year. Dispatching generation to meet time-varying demands
across the entire United States while considering transmission constraints is challenging and a
noteworthy achievement by industry personnel. The increased variability and uncertainty
introduced by renewable resources and DERs is making this real-time balancing act much more
difficult.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 3

 Department of Energy | December 2020

As these new renewable resources increase in penetration, changes in power flows to meet the
system needs will occur on a much faster time scale. System operators will struggle to keep
pace with the decision making needed to balance the system without introducing larger safety
margins. Additionally, optimizing dispatch to manage congestion and other issues will be much
more difficult with the increased uncertainty.

Threats and vulnerabilities. Under NERC reliability rules, a power system must be operated so
that it will remain stable despite the instantaneous loss of any single transmission line or
generator (i.e., N-1 contingent). Grid operators and planners manage the system by ensuring
that there is enough spare capacity on transmission lines and other equipment so that a single
contingency will not overload them. Large-scale events, unplanned events, or emerging threats
can result in multiple contingencies. In the event of overloads, relay settings may trigger
protective actions that can lead to interruptions or outages. Cascading failures of transmission
lines due to overloading contributed to the August 2003 blackout in the northeastern United
States.

Numerous power system events can cause disruptions, including component failure, human
error, seasonal weather events, and damage—either unintentional or willful. These risks
typically can be managed by robust training, drilling, planning and emergency response
procedures, effective maintenance, and overall preparedness. New threats and vulnerabilities
are emerging, such as cyber-attacks, extreme weather events, pandemics, wildfires, and
terrorist attacks, which introduce new challenges to system operator and planner decision
making. The tools, reliability rules, and options available today might not suffice to prevent or
minimize outages or recover from such events.

Advanced Transmission Technologies

Several advanced transmission technologies exist today that can be used to improve and
enhance the transmission system, spanning both grid software and grid hardware, as defined in
Figure 1. Sensor and software solutions, such as dynamic line rating and topology optimization,
focus on improvements in the control center, control systems, and decision-making processes.
Actuator and hardware solutions, such as power flow controllers and advanced conductors and
cables, focus on improvements in the physical assets and infrastructure responsible for
carrying, converting, or controlling electricity. These different technologies can be used in
isolation or in tandem to improve the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the transmission
network. These technologies can also help increase the reliability and resilience of the entire
electric power system.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 4

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Monitoring Optimization Control

Figure 1. The modern grid: An integrated system comprising grid software and grid hardware.
Source: Adapted from https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=7805372. [12]

Efficiency and effectiveness. Technologies, tools, and methods that help manage congestion
and defer transmission upgrades will increase the effective and efficient use of resources and
installed equipment.
This is especially true when transmission capacity is needed to access low-cost variable
renewable resources and new lines are increasingly difficult to build due to siting and
permitting challenges. Additionally, technologies that reduce energy losses and minimize the
amount of reserves needed to meet system reliability requirements will also improve economic
efficiency. In most cases, the ability to increase transmission capacity by removing constraints,
maximizing existing ROW, or by enabling new grid access will increase the effectiveness of
delivery to meet societal needs. For example, new solutions are needed to meet demand
growth from electric vehicles charging, especially in densely populated areas with little to no
room for new transmission and distribution infrastructure.

Reliability and resilience. FERC has stated it understands resilience to mean “[t]he ability to
withstand and reduce the magnitude and duration of disruptive events, which includes the
capability to anticipate, absorb, adapt to, and rapidly recover from such an event [13].”
Technologies, tools, and methods that help improve situational awareness, increase flexibility
and responsiveness, and enhance the grid’s ability to better handle uncertainty and unforeseen
circumstances will increase reliability and resilience. Generally, capabilities that help monitor
and respond to real-time conditions are foundational to ensuring reliability. These capabilities
can also bolster resilience if they are able to perform in emergency and unplanned situations.
While better data and analytics can improve decision making before, during, and after a
contingency or system event, the ability to actively control the flow of power provides many
new opportunities. For example, extreme events that result in outages tend to have limited

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 5

 Department of Energy | December 2020

geographic scope; enabling more power to be imported into a region from neighboring areas
that are less affected by the event can accelerate recovery. In cases where a customer’s supply
might normally be disrupted to maintain system stability, active power control can provide a
means to avoid an outage, increasing reliability.

III. Sensors and Software Solutions

Sensors and software solutions focus on improving the operations and planning of the grid
while working within the constraints of the physical hardware. These technologies generally
improve upon a short-term system outlook, such as day-ahead or real-time applications, rather
than a longer-term planning horizon. Long-term system planning seeks to find an optimal
transmission expansion plan with optimum aggregate benefits over the planning horizon. A
well-planned network can still benefit from these solutions in the short-term since real-time
network conditions will frequently differ from assumptions used in long-term planning. This
section will discuss the opportunities and specific barriers for dynamic line rating and topology
optimization.

Dynamic Line Rating

Line ratings have been an important tool in determining the current-carrying capacity of
transmission lines for over 80 years. More refined approaches using data on environmental
conditions have given operators greater ability to fully utilize capacity on transmission
networks. Dynamic line ratings (DLRs)—the latest iteration—provide system operators with
real-time data to aid decision making, helping to manage congestion and improve situational
awareness.

Static line ratings, developed in the 1930s, set the maximum current-carrying capacity based on
conservative assumptions with regard to environmental parameters [14]. Seasonal line ratings
(SLRs) that reflect changes in average temperature across seasons and ambient adjusted ratings
(AARs) that reflect changes in daily temperatures were later introduced. In the 1970s, initial
attempts were made to provide daily and hourly ratings [15]. In the 1990s, DLRs based on real-
time monitoring systems were developed that could unlock 10–25 percent of additional line
capacity [16]. However, these first-generation DLR systems had several underlying issues,
including complex installation and inconsistent measurements, which discouraged wider
adoption. Subsequent generations are being developed to address these shortcomings.

Generally, a DLR system includes: sensors mounted on or near the transmission line to be
observed; a communication system that relays information from field sensors to the control
room; a DLR analytic engine for processing and validating the data; and interfaces with energy
management systems (EMSs), supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems, and
operators to inform decisions (Figure 2). Sensors monitor, measure, and transmit data online
conditions and ambient conditions that determine the maximum current-carrying capacity of
the line in real-time. Information could include the temperature of the line, tension on the line,
line sag (or clearance to ground), ambient temperature, wind speed, and wind direction. Direct
conductor monitoring typically results in better accuracy and precision than ambient

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 6

 Department of Energy | December 2020

monitoring alone. However, this method requires many sensors to be installed on the
transmission line to support adequate coverage, which increases costs.

Figure 2. Conceptual DLR system.

Numerous pilot projects that have implemented DLR across the United States, Canada, and
Europe have demonstrated benefits. More detailed information on DLR and these projects can
be found in Section VII. Appendix – Dynamic Line Rating and in the 2019 Report to Congress on
Dynamic Line Rating [17].
Opportunities
Congestion relief. DLRs can be a cost-effective method for mitigating congestion. For example,
a study of PJM showed that a $500,000 DLR solution on the 345-kV Cook-to-Olive transmission
line between Michigan and Illinois could provide annual congestion cost savings of more than
$4 million [18]. In comparison, the cost of a traditional transmission system upgrade to
alleviate this congestion would have been between $22 million and $176 million, making the
DLR solution a fraction of the cost.a Assuming this result can be replicated across regions of the
country with ISO or RTO markets, the benefits would be approximately $240 million in annual
congestion cost savings.b

Similarly, a study in Southwest Power Pool (SPP) projected cost savings of $18,000 over 300
minutes of congestion [19]. Assuming this level of congestion persists for ten percent of the
year and the level of impacts from DLR are similar, the benefits would be equivalent to cost
savings of over $3 million from a single project. For reference, nine of the top ten constrained
transmission elements in SPP were congested between approximately seven percent and 30
percent of the time in the day-ahead market in 2018 [20].

a
This comparison focuses specifically on the benefits from congestion relief. A traditional transmission solution
could provide other benefits depending on the type of upgrade implemented.
b
Annual congestion cost for six of the major ISO/RTO regions is estimated at $4.8 billion in 2016 [17]. The
estimate of $240 million is 5 percent of $4.8 billion. The six major regions included here are CAISO, ERCOT, ISO-NE,
MISO, NYISO, and PJM. This calculation is intended to demonstrate the order of magnitude of benefits. Different
regions calculate congestion costs differently.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 7

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Improve situational awareness. DLR provides more accurate information on line conditions to
support system operator decision making. This improvement can be critical in situations where
lines may sag below clearances and make the system vulnerable to faults and safety hazards.
For example, DLR can detect when actual line ratings are lower than ratings calculated from
static methods as shown in Figure 3. This occurs infrequently, such as during a very hot day
with no wind and high solar exposure. When it does occur, DLR can assist system operators in
mitigating risks by identifying lines loaded beyond real-time capability.

Real-time rating lower than static rating

Figure 3. Illustrative example comparing potential difference results from alternative line rating methods.

By keeping lines from being overloaded, system operators can increase reliability as well as
protect the public from consequent issues of safety (e.g., fire or electric shock). For example,
DLR can identify power lines at risk of causing sparks that can lead to fires [21]. DLR systems
alone cannot avoid wildfires, but they are part of a broader solution that can provide the data
to assist in wildfire prevention strategies, including methods to operate the grid and timing on
clearing vegetation, and to upgrading equipment.

Proactive asset health monitoring. DLR can provide greater insight into the performance of a
line over time. Rather than relying on engineering assumptions and maintenance schedules,
real-time status of the line can be used in decision making to mitigate component failures,
boosting reliability. Mining the sensor data with enhanced analytics can help detect anomalies
and deliver alerts when conditions are observed that indicate a risk to reliability or public
safety. DLR can also improve reliability by informing relay settings used to protect transmission
equipment [8], providing timely updates as the system changes.

Increased operational flexibility. Transmission owners occasionally increase the static rating of
a transmission line if requested by an ISO/RTO under unique circumstances. DLRs that support
more power to be imported into a region during an outage event can increase grid reliability
and resilience. The increased operational flexibility would be beneficial during certain extreme
weather conditions, such as the 2018 “bomb cyclone” and the 2014 “polar vortex” events [22]
[23]. During these events, extremely low temperatures and wind chill caused high electricity
demand, equipment failures and fuel supply constraints that resulted in generators being taken
out of service. DLR would provide grid operators the option and ability to take advantage of
the fact that colder temperatures and high winds allow for increased capacity on transmission

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 8

 Department of Energy | December 2020

lines [17]. In general, DLR can support more electricity delivery options during a disruption and
mitigate demand interruptions, and it can also facilitate recovery and restoration after an
event.

Specific Barriers
Cost to benefit. Past studies have shown that DLR systems were able to increase line capacity
from ten percent to 70 percent of the static rating. Studies also indicate that capacity increases
over AAR are more modest and highlight the importance of evaluating the cost-effectiveness of
DLR relative to AAR. It is also important not to overestimate the potential for DLR in a region.
The addressable market for DLR is often discussed in connection with the total congestion costs
in a system, but DLR can only offset a fraction of those costs. DLR affects only the thermal
limits of a line; it is ineffective for lines with voltage or stability constraints, which usually result
in lower limits than the thermal rating. Additionally, because of the interconnected nature of
the grid, implementing DLR to alleviate congestion on a line or group of lines might shift the
point of constraint downstream to other connected lines, limiting effectiveness.

Existing markets. Existing market rules and operating constructs may be hindering the greater
use of DLR in the United States. All seven independent system operator (ISO)/regional
transmission organization (RTO) systems and their associated markets either currently use or
can accept AAR, whereas only two use DLR and AAR for day-ahead market operations.c Figure 4
shows the most common line rating method for each ISO/RTO, as well as the capability for each
entity to accept DLR or AAR into their control center. Making changes to control systems and
market operations can be expensive, and the remaining ISO/RTOs may not be willing to make
the technological investments needed to support greater use of DLR.

c
The seven ISO/RTO systems are the California Independent System Operator (CAISO), the Electricity Reliability
Council of Texas (ERCOT), Independent System Operator New England (ISO-NE), Midcontinent Independent System
Operator (MISO), New York Independent System Operator (NYISO), PJM Interconnection (PJM), and Southwest
Power Pool (SPP).

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 9

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Figure 4. ISO/RTO primary line rating method and capability.

Source: Adapted from https://www.ferc.gov/market-assessments/mkt-electric/overview.asp. [24]

Insufficient incentives. Under the current cost-of-service regulatory structure, transmission

owners receive a rate of return on capital investments for infrastructure projects. Larger and
more expensive projects will naturally return more than smaller investments. Such projects
also do not receive a return on O&M expenditures. This could further reduce the attractiveness
of DLR investments because DLR is likely to include some costs classified as O&M expenses,
which would effectively reduce potential transmission owner profits relative to alternative
capital investments [17]. In addition, the benefits of avoided congestion costs flow directly to
end-use electric customers, which further reduce the economic incentive for transmission
owners to proactively investigate and deploy DLR technology.

Measurement and modeling errors. Measurement and modeling errors can affect the
accuracy of DLR calculations and reduce confidence in the technology, limiting adoption.
Measurement errors include imprecise or inconsistent measurements and improperly
calibrated sensors. Modeling errors include inaccurate mathematical models, weather
forecasting errors, and data collection errors. Another source of error can come from
insufficient sensor deployments. If the DLR system does not cover the most limiting span of the
transmission line, values calculated could overstate the actual rating of the line. A potential
strategy to mitigate these various errors is to incorporate confidence levels into the DLR
calculation and rate lines more conservatively when confidence levels are low [17].

Other system limitations. In some cases, the maximum current-carrying capacity limit of a
transmission line could be based on the rating of substation terminal equipment, which
includes relays, current transformers, switches, and circuit breakers. Utilizing DLR to increase
line capacity without making upgrades to the limiting elements will render the DLR system
ineffective. Conducting equipment assessments and analyzing network power flows can help
identify these limiting elements before DLR deployment. Additionally, development and

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 10

 Department of Energy | December 2020

deployment of low-cost sensors that can monitor the health and status of other terminal
equipment can augment transmission line information to identify true capacity limitations. [25]

Topology Optimization
The transmission network is built with redundancy to meet and address mandatory reliability
standards under worst-case scenarios. While these redundancies support system reliability
during specific operating conditions, they might not be needed during other operating periods
and could create dispatch inefficiencies. Consequently, it might be possible to temporarily
remove a line from service under certain operating conditions and improve overall system
efficiency without jeopardizing reliability.

Topology control refers to the real-time switching of transmission branch elements, such as
transmission lines and transformers, through the opening and closing of circuit breakers to
redirect power flows.d Traditionally, real-time congestion management involves the re-
dispatch of upstream generation resources. Topology optimization, an application of topology
control, augments this method by including transmission infrastructure as a dispatchable asset
to optimize to minimize congestion.

Topology control has been studied since the early 1980s and, while often impractical, may be
used by system operators in certain emergency conditions as a corrective mechanism to
address reliability concerns [26] [27]. For example, transmission line switching may be used as
a last resort by system operators to eliminate voltage violations (i.e., voltage levels that are too
high) during lightly loaded hours [28] [29]. Utilities and system operators have also used
corrective switching to maintain system reliability following a disturbance. These actions are
more generally characterized as Special Protection Schemes (SPS) or Remedial Action Schemes
(RAS).e Although an important tool for maintaining reliability, these schemes essentially
function as look-up tables. The solutions developed are based on sets of assumed system
conditions and are inherently limited by those conditions’ pre-defined nature. These solutions
are not necessarily optimized and might be unable to handle new or unforeseen conditions.

Current topology control methods are based on system operator expertise and time-consuming
manual processes to identify switching candidates ahead of time. These documented switching
actions must still be evaluated under real-time conditions so as to not result in unintended
consequences. Recent development of tools, including artificial intelligence, that can
systematically and automatically identify optimal transmission control actions have enabled
topology optimization to emerge as a viable solution to address transmission challenges. An
example of how topology optimization software can integrate with transmission operator

d
A transmission line is switched into the network by placing it in service or energizing it. It is switched out of the
network by taking it out of service or de-energizing it. Topology refers to the arrangement of transmission branch
elements in the network. Transmission line switching changes the arrangement of lines that can supply power.
e
SPS and RAS refer to protection schemes that are designed to automatically detect abnormal or predetermined
system conditions and take predetermined corrective action to counteract the observed condition in a controlled
manner to maintain system reliability.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 11

 Department of Energy | December 2020

decision making is shown in Figure 5. The software can automatically provide the system ‘s
current state from existing operator tools, evaluate switching options, and present possible
actions to the system operator as another means to mitigate abnormal conditions. More
information on available topology optimization software can be found in Section VII. Appendix
– Topology Optimization.

Figure 5. Topology optimization integrates with operator/planner decision making.

Source: Adapted from "Transmission Topology Optimization: A Software Solution for Improving Congestion Management”
(slide 5); https://www.esig.energy/event/webinar-transmission-topology-optimization-a-software-solution-for-improving-
congestion-management [30]

Opportunities
Congestion relief. Early research on topology optimization showed the potential for up to 25
percent production cost savings,f but is reduced to 16 percent when ensuring reliability (i.e.,
meeting N-1 criteria) of the proposed solution [31]. In an SPP pilot, topology optimization was
used to relieve congestion observed on transmission lines downstream from wind resources as
shown in Figure 6 [32]. In this case, excessive wind generation was creating real-time
transmission congestion resulting in 285 megawatts (MW) of wind curtailment. The software
was able to identify three switching actions that diverted power flows around the congested
elements and provided enough relief to avoid the need for any wind curtailments, reducing
price and overall production costs.

f
Production cost refers to the fuel and non-fuel costs incurred to produce electricity to meet demand, subject to
system constraints. Non-fuel costs include operation and maintenance costs and environmental costs (such as the
cost to purchase emission allowances). Production cost savings are derived from the ability to use generation
resources more efficiently. System improvements that relieve constraints and increase the use of relatively
cheaper generation resources or reduce the use of relatively more expensive generation can reduce total
production cost and provide production cost savings. Production costs are different from electricity market prices.
Market prices are based on the marginal cost of generation; that is, the incremental cost to produce an additional
unit of electricity. Market prices are also subject to system constraints.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 12

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Figure 6. Congestion and wind curtailment relief using topology optimization.

Source: Adapted from “Transmission topology optimization: pilot study to support congestion management and ice buildup
mitigation” (slide 6); http://newgridinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Topology-Optimization_SPP-Technology-
Expo_20181115_FINAL.pdf [33]

In a study of PJM, the topology optimization software was able to identify reconfiguration
actions that resulted in a 50 percent reduction in real-time congestion costs, which extrapolates
to an estimated PJM-wide annual production cost savings of over $100 million [34]. Another
study with SPP estimated real-time market savings to be three percent of the congestion costs,
on average. Historical data show that the annual real-time market savings for SPP was
extrapolated to be between $18–44 million when used with market optimization [14] [35]. In
the United Kingdom, National Grid investigated the feasibility of adopting topology
optimization using line switching, substation reconfiguration, and alternative settings for phase-
shifting transformers. The solutions found increased the transfer capability on thermally-
limited lines by as much as 12.3 percent, which could lead to estimated annual cost savings of
£40 million (approximately $50 million) [36] [37].

Improved operations and planning. Topology optimization can be used when responding to
contingencies to help eliminate overloads and violations, minimizing outages and increasing
reliability. A study estimated that topology optimization can reduce the frequency of system
violations by at least 75 percent without incurring additional costs [32]. The software can
quickly and automatically identify optimal corrective actions given the altered operating state,
which can also increase resilience. For example, following severe weather events or other high-
impact, low-frequency events, topology optimization can provide various options to accelerate
system recovery while minimizing customer interruptions or disconnections. The technology
can also be used to improve outage scheduling and coordination, enabling options that
otherwise would lead to reliability violations or increases in congestion. In addition, the
software can mitigate adverse impacts if real-time system conditions change during a planned
outage.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 13

 Department of Energy | December 2020

SPP implemented a pilot project to identify reconfiguration solutions to previously observed

transmission overload [32]. Several solutions identified were used to develop new operating
guides for system operators.g In one instance, real-time operation staff requested support from
the topology optimization software to assess post-contingency overloads. The software quickly
identified a pre-contingency mitigation plan that reduced the power flow constraint by more
than 20 percent and eliminated the post-contingency overloads. SPP also used the software to
investigate switching solutions to mitigate demand curtailments. For all three events
considered, the software found corrective reconfigurations that relieved the flow violations
without load shedding and did not cause any other violations [32].

Economic value. Topology optimization does not require installation of new hardware, thus
reducing implementation costs. By leveraging existing transmission system infrastructure and
communications hardware, the technology can be deployed quickly and integrated easily with
existing systems. Although topology optimization is more applicable in the real-time operations
and operations planning environment, it could also be used to increase the value of system
expansion plans. For example, the increased flexibility from using topology switching can
increase the long-term value of transmission upgrades and should be considered when making
infrastructure investment decisions. Within the near-term planning horizon, topology
optimization might also help to defer some transmission line upgrades.

Specific Barriers
Computational complexity. Most approaches to topology optimization recharacterize
transmission branches as controllable assets capable of being optimized within the context of
the optimal power flow problem [38] [39]. While this might be feasible in a small system with
limited elements, this optimization problem becomes computationally intensive and much
more complicated when considering the size of U.S. power grids. With the large set of potential
line switching combinations, it becomes extremely difficult to identify optimal topologies
quickly enough for topology optimization to be effective in real-time operations.

Many researchers have presented approximations and other simplifications to reduce the
complexity of these calculations. However, there is a risk that oversimplifying the problem will
negatively affect the accuracy of results, potentially jeopardizing reliability. Application of high-
performance computing can also help reduce computation times but will come at added cost.
Research toward improving the computational performance of optimal transmission switching
algorithms is ongoing [40]. Until these issues are more fully addressed, it will be difficult to
integrate topology optimization into real-time grid operating systems.

g
Operating guides contain instructions to execute predefined transmission system actions, such as the previously
defined SPS or RAS, in response to various system conditions to prevent or resolve transmission security violations.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 14

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Existing markets. The effect of topology optimization on existing markets can be a barrier to
adoption because topology optimization undermines the prevailing market assumption that the
transmission grid is a static asset. For example, the day-ahead Financial Transmission Rights
(FTR) market requires this assumption to operate as designed [41].h Transmission outages
(including from switching actions) can lead to financial shortfalls if not modeled in the FTR
allocation and auction. Market participants will need to adapt to consider a more active role by
the market operator, if topology optimization were to be used. Mitigations for these
consequences have been proposed, including considering revenue adequacy as a constraint in
the topology optimization software, or possibly a redesign of the FTR market such that the
flexibility of the network can be accounted for in the FTR auction [42]. More research is needed
to thoroughly examine options and affected parties can participate in these developments via
an open process.

Hardware impacts. To support reliability, utilities and system operators rely on circuit breakers
to operate as expected and when directed. Implementation of topology optimization will cause
circuit breakers to operate more frequently, which will accelerate aging, increase maintenance
costs, and affect component reliability. Circuit breaker performance and longevity depend on
several factors, including switching rates, the number of switching operations, and current
magnitudes during switching events. These factors can be incorporated into the software to
limit the list of switching candidates and as another parameter to optimize. More research is
necessary to quantify the effect and costs associated with increased breaker operation to
better inform operator decision making. Accurately and completely quantifying circuit breaker
maintenance and replacement costs is needed to support greater adoption of topology
optimization.

System impacts. Switching operations, such as those associated with topology optimization,
can create disturbances that compromise the stability of the grid. Power system instabilities
can lead to cascading failures—and ultimately blackouts—if not properly managed. Research
on the effects of transmission line switching has shown that the system will remain stable
during normal operations and following a contingency with properly tuned, conventional
controls present in the system [43] [44]. However, as the power system changes with greater
deployment of inverter-based resources (e.g., wind, solar, batteries), ensuring that all these
controllers are properly tuned may not be trivial and will require investigation. Additionally,
advances in power system modeling tools that can assess system stability, explore controller
interactions, and system transients are needed to help alleviate concerns. System operators
and planners can use these tools to confirm system stability under proposed reconfiguration
solutions offline and before applying the switching action(s).

h
FTRs are financial instruments for market participants to bet on local price differences in the day-ahead market,
which arise because of the limited capacity of the transmission lines. The holder of an FTR is entitled to a stream
of revenue based on the hourly, day-ahead congestion prices between a specified source and sink. This is a
method for the holder to hedge congestion costs.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 15

 Department of Energy | December 2020

IV. Actuators and Hardware Solutions

Actuators and hardware solutions focus on increasing the physical capabilities of the underlying
grid infrastructure, and addressing the thermal, voltage, and stability limits that constrain the
transmission system. These technologies are generally more capital intensive than sensor and
software solutions and improve the long-term reliability and resilience of the grid. This section
will discuss the opportunities and specific barriers for power flow controllers, both alternating
current (AC) and direct current (DC) technologies, as well as advanced conductors and cables.i

Power Flow Controllers: Alternating Current Technologies

Power flow controllers (PFCs) are a family of technologies that can actively change the way
power flows through the transmission system without making changes to generator dispatch or
the topology of the network. The AC power flowing on a given transmission line is driven by
four key parameters based on physics of the power system: the voltage on each end of the
line, the reactance of the line, and the voltage phase angle difference between both ends. AC
PFCs operate by adjusting one or more of these parameters.

PFC technologies have existed since the early 1900s, with the earliest being phase-shifting
transformers (also referred to as phase angle regulators [PARs]) and tap-changing transformers.
The main drawbacks of these mechanically switched devices are the slow response and coarse
level of control (functionally, these devices can only be operated in discrete steps). PFC
technologies based on solid state switches (i.e., power electronics) were introduced in the
1970s and called flexible AC transmission systems (FACTS). FACTS devices offer fast and
dynamic compensation to allow more power to be transferred on a transmission line and
support the stability of the grid. Newer FACTS devices that use more advanced power
electronic switches, such as the unified power flow controller (UPFC), offer greater flexibility
and control capabilities but have seen limited deployments due to costs.

Many different AC PFCs are still in use today, especially the tap-changing transformer. There
are currently five PARs on the Michigan-Ontario power line to counter loop-flows around Lake
Erie, the first unit having been installed in 1975 [45]. In 1998, American Electric Power
deployed UPFCs on the transmission system in the Inez area to combat high power losses.
These devices added 770 MW of capacity to the system, whereas a new line would have only
added 670 MW of power transfer capability. In 2016, the New York Power Authority completed
the Marcy South Series Compensation Project, which installed three capacitor banks to expand
transmission capacity by 440 MW [46]. FACTS devices are also becoming increasingly important
for the integration of variable renewable resources in “weak” systems to support stability.

i
Electric power systems primarily operate with alternating current and voltages due to the ability to readily
transform between voltages in order to interconnect generation, delivery, and end use. However, there are
strategic advantages for using direct current and voltages, including improved efficiency and better control.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 16

 Department of Energy | December 2020

DOE is supporting the development of new AC PFC technologies to enhance control capabilities
while reducing costs [47] [48]. One example is the distributed series reactor (DSR) technology
in which multiple small, modular devices are installed along a transmission line to provide the
same capability as a single, larger system. This distributed approach makes it more cost-
effective and easier to deploy than other PFC technologies that require installation within a
substation. Figure 7 shows the operating concept for DSRs where system operators change line
reactance through a series of communication and control technologies. More information
about AC PFC technologies can be found in the Appendix.

Figure 7. Distributed DSR communication and control system.

Source: Adapted from https://www.smartwires.com/smartvalve/ [49]

Opportunities
Congestion relief. Active control of power flows provides more flexibility to manage congestion
than do passive measures. A study of PJM with novel PFC technologies examined how
economic benefits varied with the number and size of phase angle controllers (PACs) installed
[50]. The modeling could only examine congestion from thermal limits due to the complexity of
evaluating constraints that arise from voltage and stability limits. As shown in Figure 8, the
estimated annual congestion cost savings ranged from $39 million with a single device (total
size of 36 MVA) to $196 million with 17 devices (total size of 2116.5 MVA) installed at strategic
locations. Diminishing returns can also be seen with PACs installed beyond approximately 13
devices (total size of 1426.5 MVA). These savings indicated a payback period of less than three
years using assumed costs for the PFC technologies. Additionally, sensitivity analyses showed
greater benefits as the amount of renewable penetration increased, which was also the case in
scenarios with higher fuel prices.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 17

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Transmission Congestion Benefit (M$)

Figure 8. Estimated annual congestion cost savings for 1, 4, 8, 13, and 17 PAC devices in PJM.
Source: Del Rosso, A., Benefits and Value of New Power Flow Controllers, EPRI, 2018. [50]

Transmission deferral. Building new transmission infrastructure can be an expensive, time-

consuming, and controversial process. PFC technologies can maximize the use of existing assets
and defer upgrades in support of more effective and efficient transmission expansion. A study
of SPP examined the ability of novel PFCs to resolve line overloads as a way to defer or replace
proposed expansion projects [50]. Table 1 summarizes the results of this analysis and
compares the cost of the PFC solutions with the original project. In many of the cases
examined, the cost of the transmission upgrade is several times the cost of the PFC solution.j
While these results cannot be generalized due to the specific circumstances of the use cases,
the results do provide an indication of the cost-effectiveness of the novel PFC technologies. If
the PFC solution is not expected to replace the original proposed project, the benefits can be
estimated by comparing the value of deferral.
Table 1. Comparison of PFC and Transmission Solution Costs
Original PFC
Project PFC Cost
Case Original Project Cost Alternative Range Comments
1 New 115-kV line to $16.8 M Installation $1.5 M– Impedance changes necessary to avoid
remove overload at of PFCs on $5.2 M overload change over time. PFCs can be
N-1 condition two parallel installed gradually over time.
lines
2 Reconductoring $7.15 M Installation $2.4 M Deferral time greater than 10 years.
115-kV line and of PFC on PFC solution eliminates overload of two
upgrading 230/115 115-kV line system components caused by the same
kV substation to contingency, and can replace the original
address overload project.
caused by
transformer outage

j
For the purposes of the study, the PFC and transmission solution are compared only on the ability to resolve the
line overloads. New transmission lines can also provide other benefits.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 18

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Original PFC
Project PFC Cost
Case Original Project Cost Alternative Range Comments
3 Rebuilding 26 miles $14.2 M Installation $2.0 M– Cumulative value of deferral greater than
of existing 115-kV of PFC on $5.0 M $2.0M after year two and greater than
line 115-kV line $5.0 M after year five.
PFC can be a cost-effective solution if
project can be deferred more than two
years.
4 Rebuilding 77 miles $60.2 M Installation $2.4 M– Cumulative value of deferral greater than
of 138-kV of PFC on $3.7 M $4.0 M after first year.
transmission 138-kV line PFC can be a cost-effective solution even
corridor to address if deferral time is very short.
overload due to
outage of 345-kV
line
Note: The study also examined solutions to a 230-kV line overloaded due to a 345-kV line outage. The cost of the
PFC solution was between $1.12 M and $4.0 M. No specific project had been identified to resolve the overload, but
the PFC could serve as an interim solution while the long-term solution is identified and implemented.
Source: Del Rosso, A., Benefits and Value of New Power Flow Controllers, EPRI, 2018.

Transmission expansion flexibility. PFC technologies that are modular, such as DSR, are highly
mobile, scalable, and can be deployed more rapidly. These features support PFCs to be
installed gradually as the system evolves and the need for congestion mitigation arises. In
some cases, PFCs can be used to defer conventional solutions until the need is fully established.
Additionally, if system conditions change after deployment and the PFC solution is no longer
required, the devices could be redeployed to other areas of the system. Transmission
expansion flexibility can help improve the efficiency of grid planning and investments and
reduce transmission expansion costs.

Fast and controlled response. PFC technologies based on advanced power electronic switches
can make the grid more flexible and responsive to faults, disturbances, and other unplanned
situations. Unlike older PFCs, which provide coarse control, or topology switching, which is
either on or off, newer PFCs can better mitigate the effect of transients and other electrical
phenomena that can destabilize the grid. The fast and controlled response can improve
reliability by quickly and accurately responding to changing conditions and system violations,
especially with the loss of system inertia. The increased penetration of variable renewable
resources is requiring solutions that can provide reactive power support and other forms of
compensation on a time scale consistent with their variability and intermittency.

Specific Barriers
Limited deployments. Advanced PFC technologies face limited deployments because of
technology maturity, current costs, and insufficient incentives. The technologies are also
limited to overhead transmission systems that have space for equipment and are not well
suited for physically restrictive and underground transmission systems. For example, the
benefits of avoided congestion flow directly to end-use electric customers, reducing the
economic incentive for transmission owners to proactively investigate and deploy PFC
technologies. Market and system studies assessing the overall effect of PFC adoption would
provide a more comprehensive indication of their PFC value.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 19

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Current modeling tools and methods are not sufficient to fully analyze PFC effects on voltage
and stability limits. More deployment experience, perhaps through pilot projects, will also be
needed to validate the results of these studies and to demonstrate PFC effectiveness in
resolving transmission system challenges.

Existing markets. As with topology optimization, adoption of PFCs will upend existing
electricity markets based on the assumption that transmission infrastructure is static. While a
small number of deployments may be feasible under the current structure, greater number of
devices will require significant changes. Altering power flows in real-time outside of market
operations can lead to financial shortfalls and extra complexity during settlement. Market
participants will need to adapt to consider a more active role by the market operator, if PFCs
were to be used. Additionally, the integration of PFC capabilities into system models that guide
market prices has not been thoroughly investigated. Development of new market mechanisms
to accommodate this extra degree of flexibility is needed along with analysis of the respective
effects. More research is needed to thoroughly examine options and affected parties can
participate in these developments via an open process.

Established planning processes. Current transmission planning processes might limit the ability
to incorporate PFCs, especially if planners are unfamiliar with how to model or consider the
impacts of the technology. Transmission planners are required to plan for worst-case
scenarios, such as outages of transmission facilities that could render PFCs ineffective. For
example, a PFC solution would not be effective in directing power flows over a transmission
path if the path is unavailable due to an unplanned outage [51]. In this regard, the reliability
benefits of PFCs could be limited when compared with traditional transmission solutions (i.e.,
new lines). In addition to addressing specific reliability or congestion problems, transmission
upgrades typically provide redundancies that improve system resilience under emergency
conditions [51].

Transmission regulations. Generally, PFCs are installed on or in line with existing transmission
infrastructure. Without the consent or participation of transmission owners, it will be difficult
for third parties to install PFC systems [52]. This dynamic could impede the ability of new
market participants to propose PFC solutions in a competitive transmission solicitation.
Additionally, existing provisions in FERC policies might discourage deployment of these
technologies. For example, the reforms in FERC Order 1000 do not affect the right of an
incumbent transmission provider to build, own, and recover costs for upgrades to the
transmission provider’s own facilities. This means that a transmission owner could maintain a
Federal right of first refusal for PFC upgrades [53]. Alternatively, PFC solutions proposed by the
incumbent could be perceived by non-incumbents as deliberate attempts to maintain right of
first refusal and avoid larger projects that would be open to competitive procurement [53].

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 20

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Power Flow Controllers: Direct Current Technologies

Unlike AC PFC technologies, which modify parameters that govern network power flows, DC
technologies operate outside the constraints of synchronous AC systems, thus providing greater
flexibility, power flow control, and efficiency in some cases. While more limited in deployments
than AC transmission technologies due to cost and complexity, DC PFC technologies are used in
strategic application. High-Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) systems are typically used to transfer
large amounts of power over long distances, from one point to another. These types of
systems can also be used to transfer power between asynchronous AC networks, something
that is not possible with AC PFC technologies.k

Generally, an HVDC link consists of two converters (AC-to-DC on one end and DC-to-AC on the
other), HVDC transmission lines, and associated substations. Until the 1990s, HVDC converters
were primarily constructed with thyristor valves [54]. In the mid-1990s, converters using newer
power electronic devices (e.g., insulated-gate bipolar transistors) were commercialized for
HVDC applications.l The newer technology made deploying smaller HVDC links more
economical while providing more precise control of real and reactive power flows [55].m
Advances in HVDC cable technology, including the development of new lightweight polymer-
insulated cables, have also helped to reduce installation times and improve the economics of
HVDC systems [56].

In the United States, the first commercial HVDC system was the 500-kV Pacific DC Intertie
connecting the Bonneville Power Administration’s service territory in the Pacific Northwest to
the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) service territory in California that
was completed in 1970 [57]. In addition to utility-developed HVDC systems, several merchant
HVDC links have been developed in the past few years, as shown in Figure 9. There are also
numerous back-to-back converters connecting the different North American interconnections
to transfer power asynchronously. More recently, several HVDC transmission projects have
been proposed to connect low-cost electricity from wind resources in the upper-central
Midwest and solar resources in the Southwest to high-priced demand centers on the east and
west coasts. Projects include the TransWest Express Transmission Project, the Grain Belt
Express transmission line, and the SOO Green HVDC Link [58] [59] [60].

k
The U.S. power system comprises three main power grids or interconnections—the Eastern Interconnection, the
Western Interconnection and the Texas Interconnection. Although electric utilities in each interconnection
operate at a synchronized frequency of 60 Hz, each interconnection operates asynchronously with the others, and
HVDC systems are used to tie them together.
l
These converters use power electronics devices such as insulated-gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs), gate turn-off
(GTO) thyristors, and integrated gate-commutated thyristors (IGCTs). The technology is often referred to as
voltage-source converters (VSCs).
m
Real power is the power that is actually used or dissipated in the network. Reactive power is power that is
stored in the magnetic fields of inductors and capacitors, which aids in sustaining voltages in the system.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 21

 Department of Energy | December 2020

TransWest Express is expected to deliver wind energy produced in Wyoming to the Desert
Southwest (California, Nevada, Arizona); the Grain Belt Express proposes to collect wind energy
in Kansas and deliver it to Missouri, Illinois, and potentially points east within the PJM service
area; and the SOO Green HVDC Link, an underground HVDC line, would connect wind resources
in Iowa to demand centers in Illinois, providing access to the PJM market.

Figure 9. Existing HVDC lines and interties in North America.

Source: U.S. DOE, Applications for High-Voltage Direct Current Transmission Technologies [61] and ICF.

Most HVDC links are two-terminal systems, limiting the ability to control power flows between
multiple points in the grid. Due to converter limitations and other technical challenges, it has
not been practical to develop multi-terminal HVDC (MTDC) systems in most cases. However,
advances in power electronics technology and greater demand for renewable energy have
made MTDC networks more attractive in recent years [62]. Extending HVDC links to MTDC
systems is challenging but progress is being made. Table 2 shows MTDC systems currently in
operation; it is important to note China’s lead in this growing technology area. Additional
information on DC PFC technologies can be found in the Appendix.

Table 2. Selected Multi-Terminal HVDC Projectsn

No. of Voltage
Location Country Status Capacity (MW) In-Service Year
Terminals (kV)
Italy-Corsica- Italy Active 3 200,50,200 +200 1967,1988,1992
Sardinia (SACOI)
Quebec-New Canada, Active 3 2250,2138,1800 ±450 1990,1992
England U.S.

n
The Quebec – New England link was designed as a five-terminal MTDC, but the original two-terminal link was not
integrated into the three-terminal link.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 22

 Department of Energy | December 2020

No. of Voltage
Location Country Status Capacity (MW) In-Service Year
Terminals (kV)
Nanao China Active 3 200,150,50 ±160 2013
Zhousan China Active 5 400,300,100,100,100 ±200 2014
North-East Agra India Active 4 6000 ±800 2017
Zhangbei China Active 4 1500 ±500 2019
Source: Rodriguez P., K. Rouzbehi, Multi-terminal DC Grids: Challenges and Prospects, July 2017, with adjustments by ICF. [63]

Opportunities
Cost-effective power delivery. Due to HVDC’s ability to bypass areas of congestion and directly
move power from one point to another, it is often the technology of choice to deliver large
amounts of power over long distances when economically viable. Compared with conventional
AC transmission lines with similar voltage and capacity, HVDC lines have a smaller ROW
requirement, with up to 50 percent reduction in some cases [64]. For example, a bipolar HVDC
line requires only two conductors compared with six conductors in a double-circuit AC line for
the same transmission capacity, leading to smaller transmission tower configurations. As a
result, the construction costs of HVDC lines are lower than those of comparable HVAC lines
after a break-even distance (e.g., 300 km for a 1200 MW system) despite the additional
converter costs. Additionally, the losses on HVDC lines are roughly 3.5 percent per 1,000 km
compared with 6.7 percent for comparable AC lines, improving cost-effectiveness in the long
term [64].

Larger transmission capacity. HVDC lines operate at rated peak voltage at all times, unlike AC
lines that vary across time. Because the average voltage on an AC line is only 71 percent of the
rated peak, the power transmission capacity of an HVDC line with the same voltage is
approximately 40 percent higher. This fact can be useful in areas with limited ROWs;
converting an AC line to HVDC would be a potential solution to increasing transmission
capacity. Additionally, HVDC lines can operate at overloads (10 to 15 percent higher than the
rated capacity) for a limited period (less than 30 minutes). This increased capacity under
contingency conditions gives system operators sufficient time to implement mitigation
measures, improving system reliability and resilience.

Unique capabilities. HVDC’s capabilities often make it the only viable option for challenging
and unique applications. For example, in underwater or underground power delivery
applications, the physical characteristics of marine and underground cables result in excessive
voltage drops that limit the maximum distance possible with AC transmission lines [65].
Additionally, because HVDC systems can operate asynchronously, they can readily connect to
any voltage and frequency for use as interties between different AC networks worldwide. This
ability also supports new system architectures and operating concepts to be realized, such as
networked microgrids and fractal grids (i.e., a grid composed of microgrids connected
asynchronously that can change in size and scope dynamically), which are inherently more
robust, reliable, and resilient. Newer HVDC technology (i.e., voltage source converters) can
control system voltages and frequency precisely, enabling it to help restart the grid following a
blackout.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 23

 Department of Energy | December 2020

System buffering. HVDC links can help buffer different parts of the power system, helping to
manage instabilities and prevent cascading failures from propagating. For example, the Quebec
system survived the power surges during the 2003 northeast blackout because it is connected
to the eastern interconnection by HVDC lines [66]. HVDC lines can actively inject power to
balance the grid during supply-demand mismatches, helping to improve grid stability and
reliability during disturbances. HVDC systems can also buffer the grid from the intermittency
associated with variable renewable resources [67]. Aggregating the output of numerous
variable energy resources (e.g., wind farms) with HVDC systems decrease overall supply
fluctuations and help increase reliability. The enhanced controllability and ability to inject
power at any point on the AC network is a primary reason why large-scale renewable
developments increasingly consider HVDC technology in project designs.

Specific Barriers
High converter costs. Due to the high costs of HVDC converter stations and requirements for
system protection, short distance HVDC links are generally not economically feasible. Because
the cost-per-mile of DC transmission lines is lower than AC lines, HVDC systems only become
viable beyond a critical distance (e.g., 37 miles for submarine lines and 124 miles for overhead
lines) as displayed in Figure 10, thus limiting their broader application. HVDC system
components are also more complex with O&M costs that can be higher than AC technologies.
Additionally, HVDC components between vendors are not necessarily interchangeable or
interoperable, increasing costs and complexity over the lifetime of a project. To address these
challenges and increase the use of DC systems in power system applications, DOE developed a
Solid State Power Substation (SSPS) technology roadmap [68].

Figure 10. Cost comparison curves for HVDC and AC lines (generic estimates).
Source: ABB [65].

Financing and cost allocation. Under FERC Order 1000, beneficiaries of a transmission project
must pay for the project’s cost. With HVDC point‐to‐point transfers, it can be simple to
determine the primary beneficiaries. However, when these lines cross states that do not
directly benefit, cost allocation can become quite complex and contentious.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 24

 Department of Energy | December 2020

It is difficult to build a project in which costs (e.g., ROWs, environmental impact) are imposed
without some allocation of benefits. Another related barrier is that AC transmission projects
and non-transmission alternatives might be easier to finance than HVDC technologies [69].
HVDC systems will need to compete with these other solutions that system planners and
transmission owners are more familiar with, easier to justify on a cost basis, and have a more
secure or faster return [70]. Assessments of HVDC investments should account for the benefits
beyond market impacts effects such as enhanced power flow control, which can mitigate
difficult loop flows [63].

Modeling and controls. The critical component of HVDC systems is the converter. This power
electronics technology can have a much faster response time than typical generator controls,
which are coupled to the AC system frequency. Faster controls can be advantageous, but it can
introduce new dynamics and interactions that have not been studied. More precise models
and tools are needed to assess the dynamic response and behavior of the entire system to
evaluate control strategies. Despite higher fidelity models being required, the models must be
simple enough for practical use in system planning and operation. Understanding stability of
MTDC applications will be challenging since these systems have no inherent frequency or
inertia, complicating controls and analysis. Accurately capturing the dynamics and interactions
within AC networks is needed to design HVDC controllers and identify protection and control
strategies to avoid system instability or collapse.

Protection. Because DC does not cycle in time, HVDC systems require equipment that can force
the current to zero for system protection. Mechanical circuit breakers can be used but are too
slow (tens of milliseconds) to minimize arcing and excessive wear [71]. These systems also
require additional components to successfully break the current and are challenging to build
[72]. Newly developed HVDC breakers based on semiconductors can also be used [70]. These
breakers operate faster and address the limitations of mechanical designs but have reliability
challenges in the event of frequent short-circuit faults. The hybrid HVDC breaker, which
combines mechanical and power electronic components, can overcome these problems.

In addition to HVDC circuit breakers, the main challenge for protecting MTDC systems is their
novel operating paradigm with no system frequency or inertia. Effective system protection
requires the ability to identify, locate, and isolate faulted lines from the network while keeping
the rest of the system in operation. Traditional AC networks use various protection schemes
such as distance relaying to identify and locate faults. However, these established approaches
cannot be applied to MTDC systems, necessitating research and development of new methods
and technologies for fault identification and location [70].

Advanced Conductors and Cables

Conductors and cables are the fundamental hardware that carry electricity along a transmission
line. The most common overhead conductor in use today is the Aluminum Conductor Steel
Reinforced (ACSR), and it continues to be one of the most popular types used across the world.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 25

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Advances in materials and manufacturing have led to the introduction of many new conductors
with better performance; these technologies are generally referred to as “advanced overhead
conductors” (AOHCs). The primary characteristics of AOHCs include lower losses, higher
current-carrying capacity, lower weight, and low sag at high temperatures—directly addressing
the thermal limits of transmission lines.

AOHCs employ advanced aluminum alloys, steel, and composite materials in novel ways that
provide enhanced performance over conventional overhead conductors. Some recent types
include Aluminum Conductor Composite Reinforced (ACCR); Aluminum Conductor Composite
Core (ACCC); and Aluminum Conductor Carbon Fiber Reinforced (ACFR). Worldwide, utilities
have used AOHCs in a variety of applications to increase transmission capacity and to bolster a
line’s strength and robustness in harsh environments. For example, more than 750 projects
across the world have employed ACCC conductors, representing approximately 62,000 miles of
transmission lines [73]. Meanwhile, ACCR conductors are found in more than 140 countries
across five continents [74]. ACFR conductors are not as widespread as the others and are
primarily used in Southeast Asia [75].

Superconducting cables are another type of advanced transmission technology. They are
composed of materials that have near-zero resistance at extremely low temperatures, offering
little to no electrical losses if used in transmission. However, superconducting technology does
require special cooling fluids and cryogenic systems to maintain the low temperatures needed
for proper operation. To realize this opportunity, DOE began research and development efforts
on high-temperature superconductor (HTS) equipment in 1988 [76]. The world’s first HTS cable
was energized in 2000; this was followed by several HTS cable projects in the United States
including National Grid’s HTS Cable Project in Albany, New York, and Commonwealth Edison’s
Resilient Electric Grid (REG) Project in Chicago, Illinois, sponsored by the Department of
Homeland Security [77] [78] [79]. More information on advanced conductors and cables can be
found in the Appendix.

Opportunities
Increasing transmission capacity. AOHCs can have a maximum current-carrying capacity of up
to two times that of conventional conductors, supporting more power to be transferred
through a given transmission corridor. Because securing approvals to build a new transmission
line is often very difficult, reconductoring existing transmission lines with AOHCs can double the
capacity while using the existing transmission towers and established ROWs. A reconductoring
project may cost up to half as much as a new transmission line and can be completed in a
significantly shorter amount of time.

Superconducting cables can provide up to ten times the maximum current-carrying capacity of
conventional cables with the same cross-sectional area. Underground transmission cables are
often used in dense urban areas where there is insufficient space or receptivity for overhead
lines. In these areas, there is usually significant competition for limited underground space.
HTS cables may be the only viable solution to increase transmission capacity within the
available space, especially to meet demand growth from the potential mass adoption of EVs.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 26

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Reduced total costs. While the cost of AOHCs ranges from 1.5 to 5 times that of conventional
conductors, there is potential to reduce total project costs [80]. Because AOHCs have lower
weight than ASCR for the same capacity, the transmission towers required could be less robust
and less costly. The lower sag of AOHCs also means that the distance between towers could be
greater, resulting in fewer towers and lower costs. Additionally, AOHCs exhibit 25–40 percent
lower electrical losses compared with conventional conductors [81]. This higher efficiency will
result in lower system operating costs. Superconducting cables also exhibit very low losses.
While the auxiliary cooling systems required to maintain the low operating temperature
consume energy continuously, AOHCS are still more efficient than a traditional conductor at full
loading.

More robust transmission. During contingencies, overhead transmission lines may be required
to deliver greater amounts of power than originally designed for. Higher line loading increases
sag, potentially leading to flashoverso and line outages that could result in cascading failures
and widespread disruption.p AOHC’s improved strength and robustness leads to lower sag in
emergency situations, mitigating these concerns. Additionally, they are better at withstanding
stress from high winds, physical loading from snow and ice, heat from wildfires or heatwaves,
and other harsh conditions, increasing reliability. Underground transmission cables are rarely
damaged during storms, tornados, and hurricanes (but can be susceptible to flooding from
storm surge). Superconducting cables would enjoy the same relative immunity from damage
during extreme weather events while providing significantly increased transmission capacity, as
long as the cooling systems above ground are not impacted by these events.

Specific Barriers
High costs. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that electricity demand will
grow at an annual average rate of one percent over the period of 2019 to 2050 due to increases
in energy efficiency [82]. Because increased transmission capacity is a primary benefit of using
advanced conductors and cables, a low electric growth rate may limit the need for new
transmission lines or reconductoring projects using AOHCs. In general, building underground
transmission is more expensive than overhead lines (up to 10 to 15 times more costly); these
higher costs are compounded if HTS cables are used because the technology is still in a pre-
commercialization stage [84] [83]. Utilities and the private sector are not willing to invest in or
finance these new technologies without the guarantee of tangible benefits.

There remains another design barrier with superconductors that adds to their total cost. Once
tripped or de-energized due to loss of the cryogenic cooling system, these superconductors
cannot be immediately returned to service if the cooling system was offline for even a short
period of time. This is because the conductor needs to cool down to extremely low
temperatures (-270 F°) in small increments before re-energizing the line.

o
Transmission line flashover is an electrical discharge between the line and a grounded object, such as a tree.
p In 2003, several issues, including transmission outages caused by line sag, led to cascading failures that resulted
in shutdowns of much of the U.S. eastern power grid.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 27

 Department of Energy | December 2020

So, unlike with traditional AC lines, minor trips cause the superconductor to become
unavailable and unreliable for long periods of time, adding extensive costs to maintaining a
reliable grid.

Cryogenic systems. HTS cables require a reliable supply of coolant at cryogenic temperatures
to ensure proper operation. The unavailability of cryogenic systems at a reasonable cost
prevents greater adoption of HTS technology [85]. These cooling systems also require constant
power, jeopardizing their availability in the event of an outage, negatively affecting broader
system reliability and resilience [86]. Advanced cryo-refrigerators have recently been
developed that are more efficient and require less maintenance than traditional cryogenic
refrigeration systems, addressing some of the needs for HTS cable applications [85]. These new
cryogenic systems have been deployed in several HTS projects in South Korea [87] [88].

Increased complexity. While AOHCs are relatively simple in concept, their implementation can
introduce greater complexity due to new material properties and designs. These factors can
affect O&M costs, require new tools and techniques for installation, and additional training,
especially for splicing and connecting two spans. Due to the complexity of HTS cable systems,
significant technical expertise is needed during the installation and testing process, and for
operations and maintenance after energizing the line. The cryogenic systems also add a level of
complexity and vulnerability that must be considered in transmission design, planning, and
operations.

V. Integration and Adoption Challenges

Aside from AOHCs, adoption of advanced transmission technologies will challenge the methods
in which utilities, system operators, transmission planners, and markets have evolved to-date.
Effectively integrating active solutions will require changes to established institutions,
regulations, processes, systems, and business practices to reflect the resultant effect. In the
case of HTS cables, the cryogenic system is an active component that introduces new
vulnerabilities and operating considerations. In addition to the specific barriers identified for
each technology, there are fundamental challenges to integration and adoption that are more
crosscutting.

Market readiness. In regions with ISOs/RTOs, advanced transmission technologies can only
influence congestion costs if the technologies are integrated into market and operation
systems. A “causality dilemma” exists, however, in which the ISOs/RTOs have no reason to
modify systems to accommodate advanced transmission technologies unless sufficient
transmission owners choose to adopt them; and transmission owners have no reason to adopt
the new technologies unless the ISOs/RTOs systems incorporate such systems into their
markets and operations. Market operators also point to technology limitations of existing
systems as an impediment to incorporating new technologies into markets and operations. For
example, operators using DLR or topology optimization might not have systems immediately
capable of handling the larger data volumes or computational complexity associated with these

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 28

 Department of Energy | December 2020

technologies. Regulators can provide improved guidance and support efforts to recover
expenditures needed to integrate new transmission technologies.

FERC has initiated action on these issues through several different initiatives. These efforts
encompass a workshop on line rating methodologies (in FERC Docket AD19-15-000), a
workshop on advanced transmission technologies (in FERC Docket AD19-19-000), and a notice
of proposed rulemaking on transmission incentives (in FERC Docket RM20-10-000), including
incentives for advanced transmission technologies. This approach continues to be used.

Proper evaluation. Investment decisions in advanced transmission technologies will need to

consider total lifecycle costs, including capital costs and O&M costs, weighed against their
direct benefits. These evaluations are challenging, and the potential economic benefits
identified are specific to individual projects and technologies. Typically, the value of additional
transmission capacity provided is compared with the cost of an equivalent amount of
incremental generation capacity that would have been needed.

Additionally, advanced transmission technologies must compete against conventional solutions

that may be more widely used, better understood, more reliable, less expensive to maintain
and repair, and cheaper to install and maintain.

Utilities and grid operators must also be convinced that the benefits of installing advanced
transmission technologies outweigh the costs. Other than economics, there are many factors
that can influence considerations and trade-offs between technologies, such as vulnerabilities
and risks introduced. Advanced transmission technologies can also provide benefits that are
more difficult to quantify including the value of asset deferral, improved health monitoring,
better situational awareness, improvements in public safety, and increased resilience. Current
evaluation methods do not adequately assess technologies across multiple applications and
value streams. Consistent frameworks, methods, and supporting modeling and simulations
tools are needed to properly evaluate and compare different technologies.

Insufficient incentives. Under the current cost-of-service regulatory structure, transmission

owners and utilities receive a rate of return on their capital investments for infrastructure
projects. Regulators can offer additional incentives to utilities to install advanced transmission
technologies. For example, a utility could receive a bonus on its rate of return if it shows that
the installation resulted in improvements to several metrics. These metrics could include
performance-based outcomes such as reduced outage minutes, number of new customers
added, improved efficiency, new renewable capacity connected, greenhouse gas emissions
reductions, or other non-energy-related benefits.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 added section 219 to the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824s),
which directed FERC to develop incentive-based rates for electric transmission. FERC

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 29

 Department of Energy | December 2020

implemented its incentive policy in a July 2006 order.q In a November 2012 policy statement,
FERC noted it remained open to new incentive proposals aimed at supporting projects that
effectively encourage the deployment of new technologies or of practices that provide
demonstrated benefits to consumers [89]. In March 2020, FERC issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking for a 100 basis point incentive on the cost of transmission technologies that
enhance reliability, efficiency, and capacity, as well as improve the operation of new or existing
transmission facilities. This notice also proposed a separate deployment incentive aimed at
easing the implementation burden for transmission technologies [90].

Other countries have developed different incentive structures to encourage advanced

transmission technologies. For example, the United Kingdom permits a transmission owner to
share in the savings if a project costs less than a unit cost target determined by the regulator,
incentivizing lower-cost solutions [91] [92]. In Australia, the regulator requires transmission
service providers to submit a network capability incentive parameter action plan as part of the
revenue request [93] [94]. Transmission owners develop a package of proposals over a five-
year planning horizon, and smaller projects receive a 50 percent higher return on capital
compared with larger investments.

Utility risk aversion. Utilities are generally conservative when it comes to newer technologies
because the implications of adopting a solution that ultimately turns out to be problematic can
be significant in terms of liability and damage compensation. The conservatism also stems from
the fact that a reliable supply of electricity ensures that public health, safety, and essential
services can function as needed. Furthermore, the much higher cost to implement and
maintain new unproven technologies directly effects customer rates. In the U.S., the electric
supply is one of the most reliable in the world, and there is often little incentive to promote and
integrate new, unproven technologies in the system. System planners are required to meet
transmission planning standards, and new technologies might not perform as well as traditional
solutions under normal or high stress events. It is natural for utilities to justify adoption of new
technologies due to the severe health, safety, and economic consequences of failures. While
this approach is one of the important factors contributing to the current high level of reliability
of the power system in the United States, it is also one of the factors contributing to the slower
adoption of innovations [95].

Utilities are charged with the responsibility of providing safe and reliable electric service while
making prudent, cost-effective investments. As such, it can be difficult to obtain regulatory
approval for more expensive and riskier advanced technologies. Regulators need awareness of
the broader benefits of advanced transmission technologies, moving away from a focus on
minimizing short-term capital costs. Issues of liability could also affect the deployment of these

q
Promoting Transmission Investment through Pricing Reform, Order No. 679, 116 FERC ¶ 61,057, order on reh'g,
Order No. 679-A, 117 FERC ¶ 61,345 (2006), order on reh'g, 119 FERC ¶ 61,062 (2007). On April 2, 2020, FERC
published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register proposing revisions to the regulations
implementing section 219 of the Federal Power Act. 85 Fed. Reg. 18,784 (Apr. 2, 2020). Comments were due July
1, 2020, for FERC’s Final Rule.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 30

 Department of Energy | December 2020

new technologies. For example, it might not be clear who bears the responsibility if a new
technology deployed in the field proves to be faulty over time—the system operator, the
transmission owner, or the technology vendor [53]. Utilities should work with vendors and
regulators to get aligned on maintenance and service requirements, repair needs, certification,
and warranties to manage risks.

System operator comfort. Adopting advanced transmission technologies into utility operations
will require the integration of technological systems as well as human processes. Some of
these technologies might require new equipment in the control room, increase human
intervention, and demand additional training. Trust in the performance of the new
technologies is also critical for operator comfort. For example, DLRs can deliver inaccurate data
at times, which may significantly hamper the operators’ ability to dispatch the system while
keeping both reliability and economics in mind. Additionally, the higher delivery capacity of
HTS cables or HVDC lines means that their loss (due to failures or outages) can result in a
greater destabilizing force that can affect grid reliability. This is an important consideration and
potential vulnerability that needs to be incorporated into planning and operations.

Utilities and system operators must also be familiar with the operation of these new
technologies to mitigate unintended consequences. Utilities must develop plans to train
existing staff or hire new personnel to maintain and repair these new technologies after
installation.

Cybersecurity requirements. Cybersecurity is an important aspect of implementing any grid

enhancing system, including advanced transmission technologies. In the recent past, there
have been many credible reports that point to cyber intrusion in our energy sector from
adversaries abroad. The fact that adversaries have infiltrated the U.S.’s energy systems and can
easily cause disruptions to the electric supply highlights the importance of strong cybersecurity.
Such actions can result in equipment damage, unintended equipment outages on the bulk-
power system, resulting in loss of reliable energy supplies to customers.

Field sensing devices, communication links, third-party hosting services, controllers, power
electronics, and other elements of a new system are all potential threat vectors available to
malicious actors. To support grid reliability, advanced transmission technologies must comply
with NERC reliability standards and other cybersecurity requirements. Ultimately, cybersecurity
will depend on product features provided by vendors and a utility's ability to implement these
features to develop end-to-end solutions. Cybersecurity is an ongoing process throughout the
life cycle of a technology and must be evaluated and updated continuously to be effective.
Understanding the implications of cybersecurity requirements and developing best practices for
the various advanced transmission technologies will be a challenge. Objective risk assessment
methods could provide a means to evaluate risks and prioritize mitigation measures.

Technology validation. Utilities and system operators are conservative entities that expect
new technology systems and components to be tested, evaluated, and proven to be reliable
before adoption. While some large organizations and manufacturers have experience

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 31

 Department of Energy | December 2020

developing and demonstrating the reliability of new technologies for use in power transmission,
there is less experience in the U.S. with long-duration trials and large deployments that require
utility partners. This challenge can become insurmountable for advanced transmission
technologies developed by smaller or newer companies. Public-private partnerships, with
support from academia and research institutions, are needed to validate the performance of
new technologies in realistic environments, at scale, and over extended periods. Development
of testbeds and research facilities that can prove out these technologies on smaller scales will
also help. Finally, tutorials and educational forums to enhance knowledge, share lessons
learned, and disseminate validation results are needed to accelerate adoption.

VI. Conclusion
In light of the rapid changes to the U.S. electric power system, from increased penetration of
variable renewable generation to more frequent and extreme weather events, new challenges
are arising that affect the reliability, efficiency, and effective use of the transmission network.
Today’s electric grid faces limitations in terms of both software and hardware capabilities to
address these challenges, highlighting opportunities to improve situational awareness,
flexibility, and resilience. Solution sets that span both software and hardware components are
needed to address current and future grid challenges.

From real-time monitoring of transmission lines and software tools that optimize decision
making, to new PFCs that provide faster response and improved conductors that increase
thermal limits, to ensure addressing Cyber threat issues in a timely manner, a portfolio of
technology solutions exists that can be used to enhance the efficiency, effectiveness, reliability,
and resilience of the transmission system.

Advanced transmission technologies are diverse in maturity, application, and capabilities.

Some solutions have existed since the 1900s, whereas others have only been made possible
due to recent advances in underlying technologies such as communications, computation, and
power electronics. Some are relatively simple to adopt, while others are more sophisticated,
and some can fundamentally change existing grid operating paradigms. These technologies all
possess different capabilities that can improve the transmission system, but they also face
unique barriers. Selecting the optimal set of technologies for a given situation will require
assessments that can evaluate advanced transmission technologies against one another, as well
as against traditional solutions. While direct economic benefits can be apparent, other benefits
are harder to quantify, such as improved situational awareness, asset deferral, and improved
resilience. A robust framework and methodology, along with associated modeling and
simulation tools, are needed to support this determination.

Despite the potential benefits offered by these advanced transmission technologies, several
broad issues can impede their integration and adoption. Market readiness, market design
issues, insufficient incentives, misalignment of incentives, utility risk mitigation, operator
acceptance, planning limitations, incumbency issues, third party operation of equipment, and
mitigation of cybersecurity concerns are all challenges that require both technical and

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 32

 Department of Energy | December 2020

nontechnical solutions and new approaches by utilities, grid operators, and regulators. In most
cases, cost reductions and proven field performance are requirements for broader deployment.
DOE, working in concert with the private sector and research institutions, can support
education, research, development, and demonstration efforts to address these barriers and
concerns. Success in these endeavors can accelerate commercialization of products that will
see growing markets worldwide. Investing in advanced transmission technologies presents
opportunities for U.S. leadership and domestic manufacturing, especially with grid hardware
technologies.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 33

 Department of Energy | December 2020

VII. Appendix
Dynamic Line Rating
Dynamic line rating (DLR) technologies are Line Rating Methods
systems and methods that can be used to
Static line rating (SLR) makes conservative
determine the real-time or forecasted assumptions about environmental conditions to
current-carrying capacity (or ampacity) of calculate a line limit. A SLR can remain
transmission lines. This dynamic rating is unchanged for the lifetime of the line (decades)
achieved through calculations based on unless engineers revisit the assumptions used to
measurements of ambient conditions and calculate the original limit. Static ratings that are
the physical properties of the line, while adjusted on a seasonal basis may be referred to as
ensuring reliability standards specified by seasonal line ratings.
the North American Electric Reliability Ambient adjusted rating (AAR) uses ambient air
Corporation (NERC) are met. temperature to adjust line ratings over time. AAR is
considered a form of dynamic rating technology by
DLR systems provide the ability for
some stakeholders, although using wide area
operators to adjust line ratings ahead of weather forecasts does not provide the spatial and
time or in real-time conditions to help temporal resolution possible with more advanced
relieve transmission challenges. Static line dynamic rating methods that use sensors near or
ratings (SLRs) are calculated using on line sections.
conservative assumptions about system Dynamic line rating (DLR) uses sensors near or
conditions and are kept fixed over long on the line to frequently measure environmental
periods of time. Dynamic ratings are often and conductor conditions relevant to line ratings.
higher than these static ratings, unlocking Environmental conditions affecting line ratings
available capacity that would otherwise include ambient air temperature, wind speed and
have been unused. DLRs can also provide direction, solar irradiance, and humidity.
flexibility that can help system operators
improve operational efficiency. Ambient adjusted ratings (AARs) can be considered a form of
DLR, utilizing changes in ambient air temperatures over time. However, the more advanced
DLR methods that use sensors near or on critical line sections provide for enhanced spatial and
temporal resolution.
In a typical DLR system, the information acquired by field sensors is transmitted to the control
room through communication systems such as satellite radio, cellular networks, fiber optics, or
other radio technologies. These communication systems are required to meet NERC’s Critical
Infrastructure Protection standards to verify data authenticity and to prevent cybersecurity
breaches. An analytics engine in the control center validates and filters the sensor information,
performs error detection, and calculates the real-time line ratings. The error detection system
can flag persistent errors and anomalies that could indicate degrading or malfunctioning
sensors, helping to eliminate erroneous calculations. The analytics engine can also be
configured to use static ratings as a backup during errors to improve reliability. Weather
forecasts have also been combined with analytics engines to forecast line ratings and augment
real-time analyses.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 34

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Ultimately, the calculated line rating is transmitted to operator systems (e.g., energy
management system [EMS]/SCADA) for use in generation scheduling, dispatch decisions, and
other power market functions. The information can also be displayed for network monitoring
and control purposes.
Table 3 summarizes recent DLR studies and pilots in the United States, Canada, and Europe. Of
the nine projects listed, only three are actual market implementations, and two of these three
are outside the United States. The remaining six projects were demonstrations that included
the installation of field devices (i.e., sensors), communication networks, and systems for data
acquisition and analysis.
Table 3. Selected DLR Implementation and Pilots in the United States, Canada, and Europe
Observed
Project Type of DLR Benefit(s) Benefit Calculation Financial Benefits Increase in Line
Participants Implementation Assessed Technique ($) Capacity
LineVision, PJM, Demonstration Avoided Production cost Annual congestion Not mentioned
American congestion costs modeling in savings of $4 M on
Electric Power on 18-mile, 500-kV PROMOD base case
(AEP) [96] line congestion costs of
$78 M (savings
were five percent of
original congestion
costs)

Oncor, Nexans, Demonstration Increased line Production cost Not mentioned Six percent–14
Electric capacity, modeling, cost percent over
Reliability congestion comparison of ambient-adjusted
Council of Texas mitigation, and traditional and DLR ratings for 83
[97] transmission solutions percent of the
upgrade deferral time
on several 345-kV 30 percent–70
and 138-kV lines percent over static
line ratings for 83
percent of the
time

Southwest Demonstration Avoided Calculation of change Cost savings of Not mentioned

Power Pool, congestion costs in real-time market $18,000 in the real-
AEP, Line Vision on a 2.1-mile, 161- costs time market over
[98] kV line 300 minutes of
congestion

Genscape, Inc. Demonstration Avoided Calculation based on Net annual cost 10 percent over
[99] congestion cost on shift factors and reduction to nearby static line rating
161-kV line marginal congestion wind farm of during 90 percent
costs $655,000 with of all hours and
congestion 97percent of
alleviation hours posting
congestion

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 35

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Observed
Project Type of DLR Benefit(s) Benefit Calculation Financial Benefits Increase in Line
Participants Implementation Assessed Technique ($) Capacity
New York Power Demonstration DLR reliability and Not mentioned Not mentioned 24 percent over
Authority, economics the static rating
Electric Power compared with for 50 percent of
Research AAR, wind energy the time and 64
Institute [100] integration on two percent over the
230-kV lines, static rating five
6.5 miles and percent of the
37 miles long, time
respectively

PacifiCorp Full deployment Increased line Not mentioned Not mentioned 19 percent over
(Wyoming) [101] capacity, wind static line rating.
energy integration Operation of the
on 31-mile, 230-kV DLR system is
line limited to the
winter months

Ampacimon, Elia Full deployment Avoided Production cost Reduced congestion Forecasted DLRs
(Belgium) [102] congestion cost on modeling worth €247,250 were 10 percent
five transmission ($266,672) for a greater on
lines 4-hour period average than the
static line ratings

Northern Ireland Full deployment Increased line Not mentioned Not mentioned Average increase
Electricity [103] capacity, wind of 18 percent over
energy integration static line rating
on two 110-kV
circuits

AltaLink Demonstration Use of additional Not mentioned Not mentioned Real-time ratings
(Canada) [104] headroom on four were above
transmission lines seasonal ratings
95.1 percent of
the time, with a
mean increase of
72 percent over
static ratings

Topology Optimization
The first production-grade topology optimization software was developed by NewGrid as part
of an Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) project that concluded in May 2016
[105]. This project succeeded in developing control algorithms for optimizing transmission
network topology that led to commercialization of the NewGrid Router software. The tool was
first demonstrated in a case study using historical data from the PJM real-time energy markets.
The study evaluated three representative weeks in 2010, including one summer, one winter,
and one shoulder (autumn) week. Using generation and transmission constraint data together
with a fully detailed nodal model of the network, the software was able to identify
reconfiguration actions that resulted in a 50 percent reduction in real-time PJM congestion
costs. This result extrapolates to an estimated annual production cost savings of over $100
million across PJM [106].

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 36

 Department of Energy | December 2020

In 2018, the Brattle Group and NewGrid studied the benefits of topology optimization for the
Southwest Power Pool (SPP) market. In this study, SPP staff selected 20 real-time snapshots of
the SPP system as a representative set of complex constraints under severe or extreme system
conditions. The NewGrid Router software identified reconfiguration options for the selected
constraints, which were then validated on the EMS to ensure the solutions were feasible and
met pre- and post-contingency reliability criteria. Figure 11 illustrates the architecture for the
software, which iterates between exploring possible reconfiguration solutions and analysis to
verify it is feasible and does not result in new violations.

The solutions identified suggest that the real-time market cost savings were three percent of
congestion costs, on average. Using historical real-time congestion, the study estimated that
the software could provide annual real-time market savings of $18–$44 million when used with
market optimization [32].r

Figure 11. NewGrid router architecture.

Source: Adapted from "Transmission Topology Optimization: A Software Solution for Improving Congestion Management” (slide
5); https://www.esig.energy/event/webinar-transmission-topology-optimization-a-software-solution-for-improving-congestion-
management [30]

SPP subsequently implemented a pilot that used the topology optimization software to identify
reconfiguration solutions to previously observed transmission overloads [32]. Several solutions
were used to develop new operating guides for operators.s In one instance, the software
identified a pre-contingency mitigation plan that reduced the constraint flow by more than 20
percent and eliminated the post-contingency overloads.

r
Market optimization supports generation to be redispatched following the topology reconfiguration solution to
provide additional market savings.
s
Operating guides contain instructions to execute predefined transmission system actions, such as the previously
defined Special Protection Schemes or Remedial Action Schemes, in response to various system conditions to
prevent or resolve transmission security violations.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 37

 Department of Energy | December 2020

SPP also used the NewGrid Router software to investigate switching solutions to mitigate
demand curtailments allowed under NERC Transmission System Planning Performance
Requirements TPL-001-4.t For all three events considered, where SPP’s established plans
required substantial demand shedding, the software found corrective reconfigurations that
relieved the flow violations without load shedding and did not cause any other violations [32].

The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) currently uses topology optimization in
operations planning, including development of a Constraint Management Plans (CMP) [107].
CMPs are of a set of predefined transmission system actions to be executed in response to
system conditions that would lead to security violations. Using the NewGrid Router software,
ERCOT was able to avoid load shedding actions in a previously defined CMP by identifying an
alternative solution [108]. Meanwhile, the other existing CMPs were verified as the most
effective solutions using the same software.

Power Flow Controllers: Alternating Current Technologies

Power flow control is the ability to Governing Equation for AC Power Flows
change the way power flows
To understand how alternating current (AC) power flow
through a transmission line or control technologies work, consider the four variables that
network. This ability can improve govern the flow on a transmission line shown in the
the utilization of the grid, for equation below:
example, by redirecting power flow
∗ ∗
from congested lines to lines with sin cos
available capacity. Power flow
controllers (PFCs) operate by Where
adjusting the parameters that P is the real power flowing on the line
determine the amount and direction
Q is the reactive power flowing on the line
of flow in a transmission line. As
shown in the box, the real and V1 is the sending end voltage
reactive power flowing on a line is V2 is the receiving end voltage
governed by four key variables.
X is the reactance of the line
Technologies that can effectively
change any one of these parameters δ is the difference in phase angles between the sending
and receiving end voltages
will function as an AC PFC. When
considering the effect of these four
parameters, active and reactive power flow control can be effectively decoupled. The physics
of the system indicate that changes to the voltages have a larger effect on reactive power flow,
whereas changes to the impedance (or reactance) and the phase angle have a stronger effect
on real power flow.

t
NERC Reliability Standard TPL-001-4 establishes transmission system planning performance requirements
following a wide range of probable contingencies. Under the most severe contingencies, load shedding is a
mitigation method to resolve violations resulting from the contingency.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 38

 Department of Energy | December 2020

By similar reasoning, technologies that adjust voltages control reactive power flow, while
technologies that adjust impedances and phase angles control real power flow.

The earliest AC PFC technologies were phase-shifting transformers (PST) and tap-changing
transformers, which are still in operational use today. PSTs change the voltage angle on one
end of a transmission line to control real power flows, while load tap-changing transformers
adjust voltages (via taps corresponding to different transformer turn ratios) to control reactive
power flows. The main drawback of these technologies is that they are mechanically switched,
resulting in slow response and operation in discrete steps. PFC technologies that change
impedance include controllable capacitors or reactors installed in series with the transmission
line. Table 4 summarizes conventional PFCs and associated control methods.

Table 4. Conventional PFC Technologies

Device Control Method
Phase-Shifting Transformer Angle Variation
Series Capacitor Impedance Variation
Switched Shunt Capacitor and Reactor Voltage Variation
Synchronous Condenser

Flexible AC transmission system (FACTS) devices are a family of AC PFCs based on solid state
devices. The first FACTS devices were static Var compensators (SVCs), thyristor-based units that
offered fast, dynamic, shunt compensation by controlling a reactor or shunt capacitor. Later
on, the thyristor-controlled series capacitor (TCSC) was introduced, to support greater power
transfer capability. Advanced PFC technologies available today, which are based on improved
power electronics, are smaller, faster, and do not produce harmonics. Examples include the
Static Series Synchronous Compensator (SSSC), the Static Synchronous Compensator
(STATCOM), and the Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC), which combines an SSSC and a
STATCOM. Table 5 lists several FACTS devices and their control methods.
Table 5. FACTS Devices
Device Control Method
Thyristor Switched Series Compensator Impedance Variation
Thyristor-Controlled Series Compensator
Static Synchronous Series Compensator
Static Var Compensator Voltage Variation
Static Compensator
Unified Power Flow Controller Other
Interline Power Flow Controller

ARPA-E’s Green Electricity Network Integration (GENI) program focused on advancing PFCs and
other technologies that would help increase flexibility in the grid, investing $35.5 million across
15 different projects [109]. GENI helped develop new PFC technologies that are simpler, more
compact and scalable, and more responsive than traditional PFCs.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 39

 Department of Energy | December 2020

These solutions included Smart Wires’ modular PFC technology, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory’s magnetic amplifier, Michigan State University’s transformerless UPFC, and
Varentec’s compact dynamic phase angle regulators (CD-PARs).

Smart Wires’ distributed series reactors are small, modular, and thus easily deployable. These
devices vary the impedance on the transmission line to reroute power flows. In 2013, the
Tennessee Valley Authority successfully tested 100 of these units on a 161-kV transmission line
in Knoxville, Tennessee [110]. In 2019, Smart Wires collaborated with UK Power on a project
dubbed LoadShare to relieve a congested zone on UK Power’s network. The project reportedly
freed up 95 MW of additional network capacity and saved customers £8 million compared with
traditional upgrades. Additionally, National Grid Electricity Transmission in the U.K. signed an
agreement with Smart Wires for the installation of five modular power flow devices across their
network. This deployment is expected to increase transmission capability by 1.5 GW. Electric
utilities in Greece, France, and Australia have also tested these devices on their systems.

Oak Ridge National Laboratory developed a “cost-effective” magnetic amplifier PFC (MAPFC).
This device concept consists of a DC control winding and an AC winding, both wrapped around a
magnetic iron core similar to that of a large power transformer. During installation, the AC
windings are connected in series with a transmission line. Once energized, the power flowing
through the device is controlled by varying the current in the DC winding, thus altering the line
impedance. Due to the materials used and the relatively simple design, this technology could
provide a low-cost PFC solution.

Michigan State University’s transformer less UPFC operates with the same principles as a UPFC.
It can adjust voltage phase angle and voltage magnitude, thus controlling both real and reactive
power flows. As the name implies, the design does not require the large transformers found in
conventional UPFC devices, using power electronics instead. These novel devices are compact
and lightweight, modular and scalable, easier to install, and have a faster dynamic response
than UPFCs. An initial pilot deployed this technology on a 115-kV line from East Towanda to
South Troy, Pennsylvania. In addition to increasing wind power injection, the device was tested
for its capability to reduce loop flows. The team is on track to install this technology on the
MISO system for further testing.

Varentec’s CD-PAR is a low-cost option that injects small voltages into a transmission line to
control power flow [111]. A prototype was installed on a 12.47-kV distribution network in
Georgia by Southern Company for testing. In addition to power flow control, it successfully
demonstrated the ability to interconnect radial feeders, giving customers the opportunity to
access multiple power sources to boost reliability. The technology concept is expected to be
scalable up to the 115-kV to 160-kV range.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 40

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Power Flow Controllers: Direct Current Technologies

High-voltage direct current (HVDC) and converter technology was pioneered by Sweden’s ASEA
as early as 1929 [112]. The first commercial HVDC link, developed by ASEA, was constructed in
1954 to carry power between mainland Sweden and the island of Gotland. The line was rated
at 100-kV and had the capacity to deliver 20 MW of power. Until the 1990s, HVDC converters
were constructed with thyristor valves, which could turn on at will but required external circuits
to turn off [112]. In the mid-1990s, HVDC converters using more advanced power electronic
devices were commercialized.u These devices can turn on and off at will, providing improved
control and making smaller HVDC systems more economical [55]. HVDC’s precise control of
voltage and current enables active control of real and reactive power flows [113].v

In the United States, the first commercial HVDC project was the 500-kV Pacific DC Intertie
connecting the Bonneville Power Administration in the Pacific Northwest to the Los Angeles
Department of Water and Power (LADWP) in California [57]. The project was completed in
1970 and was a collaborative effort between General Electric and ASEA. The line was built to
deliver low-cost hydropower from the Bonneville Power Administration region to demand
centers in southern California. Another project in the Western Interconnection is the
Intermountain HVDC Transmission link (or Path 27) between the Adelanto Converter Station in
the LADWP service territory and the Intermountain Converter Station in Delta, Utah. This
bipolar line is capable of operating at ±500 kV and transmitting up to 2,400 MW of power. In
the Eastern Interconnection, the longest-operating HVDC link is the Quebec-New England
Transmission that connects Radisson, Quebec and Sandy Point in Ayer, Massachusetts. The line
is capable of operating at ±450 kV and can transmit up to 2,000 MW. This line was built to
deliver low-cost hydropower from the Hydro-Quebec region to demand centers in the Boston
area of Massachusetts [114].

Until recently, the longest HVDC line in the world was the Rio Madeira link in Brazil, at 600-kV
and 2,400 kilometers (km) long, connecting hydropower plants in the Madeira River in the
Amazon basin to major urban demand centers such as São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro in the
southeastern part of Brazil [115]. In January 2019, China energized the Changji-Guquan ultra-
high-voltage direct current (UHVDC) link between the Xinjiang regions in the northwest to
Anhui province in the eastern region of China. The UHVDC line is rated at 1,100-kV, spans 3,000
km in length, and provides 12 GW of transmission capacity. The completion of this project set
world records for HVDC lines in terms of voltage, transmission capacity, and line length [116].
Even before the Changji-Guquan UHVDC link, China was a world leader in the construction of
HVDC transmission lines, having successfully implemented UHVDC transmission lines rated at
800-kV and above [117].

u
These converters used power electronics devices like insulated-gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs), gate turn-off
(GTO) thyristors, and integrated gate-commutated thyristors (IGCTs). The technology was referred to as voltage-
source converters (VSCs).
v
Real power is the power that is actually used or dissipated in the network. Reactive power is power that is stored
in the magnetic fields of inductors and capacitors, which helps sustain voltages in the system.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 41

 Department of Energy | December 2020

In addition to these utility-developed HVDC links, numerous merchant HVDC links have been
developed in the past few years. These projects are primarily submarine cable systems that
interconnect adjacent ISO/RTO systems or supply power to large urban demand centers. These
include Trans Bay Cable in San Francisco (±200 kV, 400 MW), Cross Sound Cable (± 150 kV, 330
MW), Neptune Cable (550-kV, 660 MW), and Hudson Transmission Partners (660 MW). In
addition, there are more than 15 back-to-back HVDC facilities or AC-AC interties between the
grid networks in North America, including the Eastern Interconnect, Western Interconnect,
ERCOT, and Comisión Federal de Electricidad (CFE) in Mexico.

Most HVDC links in the United States and elsewhere are in a bipolar configuration [118]. The
advantage of a bipolar link is that if one pole or line fails, the link becomes a monopolar link,
and half of the rated capacity can still be delivered. For underground or undersea applications,
HVDC cables typically come in two types, solid or oil filled [118]. The solid type, also called
mass impregnated (MI) cables, are insulated with paper tapes impregnated with high-viscosity
oil. MI cables are typically used for long distance, high-voltage applications because they have
no length limitations and are more economical. The oil-filled type is completely insulated with
low-viscosity oil, works under pressure, and is typically used at distances less than 60 km [118].
In recent years, extruded insulation cables using cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) have been
developed to mitigate concerns with oil leakages [119].

Figure 12 is a schematic comparing HVDC lines to a multi-terminal HVDC (MTDC) network; the
dashed lines represent HVDC lines and the solid lines represent AC lines. In both
configurations, the HVDC lines connect to the AC network at the same three buses. Although
the connections are the same, the MTDC network (right) requires far fewer converters,
highlighting one of its major advantages. Despite reduced converters, high costs and technical
challenges associated with protection have made it impractical to develop MTDC projects in
most cases. Nevertheless, advances in power electronics and increasing demand for renewable
energy have made MTDC more attractive in recent years. Newer HVDC systems, using voltage
source converters, are more appropriate for MTDC applications.

Figure 12. HVDC lines compared with HVDC network.

Source: Kirkham, H., et al., An Introduction to High Voltage DC Networks, February 2014. [120]

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 42

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Medium Voltage Direct Current (MVDC) is another DC technology that has become more
attractive due to recent changes in the power system and advances in power electronics.
Applications such as offshore wind, microgrids with renewable energy sources, data center and
buildings, subsea electrification systems, transportation, and oil and gas electrification systems
are utilizing MVDC to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the grid [121]. As shown in
Figure 13, MVDC can support the integration of many different types of resources and loads,
spanning both AC and DC technologies. This technology can provide efficiencies by reducing
the number of conversion stages required to connect renewable generation to the grid, as well
as supporting the integration of electric vehicles and sensitive loads on the customer side [122].
While these applications are primarily at or below 69-kV, improved power flow control on the
distribution system translates to improvements on the transmission network.

Figure 13. Conceptual MVDC system.

Source: Reed, G.F., Ship to Grid: Medium-Voltage DC Concepts in Theory and Practice, November 2012. [122]

Advanced Conductors and Cables

New conductors offering enhanced performance, such as extended high-temperature operation
without loss of tensile strength; reduced mechanical, chemical, and electrical deterioration; less
elongation; and improved current-carrying capacity, emerged in the middle of the 20th century.
These advanced designs include Aluminum Conductor Steel Supported (ACSS), All Aluminum
Alloy Conductor (AAAC), Aluminum Conductor Alloy Reinforced (ACAR), and Thermal-Resistant
Aluminum Alloy Conductor Steel Reinforced (TACSR) types.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 43

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Along with the development of the Gap-type aluminum alloy conductorw and Invar alloy
conductor,x utilities can now deploy transmission lines with a much higher current-carrying
capacity because they can operate at higher temperatures for an extended period with low sag.
These advanced conductor technologies are also referred to as high-temperature, low-sag
(HTLS) conductors.

Manufacturers generally employ two strategies to achieve HTLS conductors. One strategy is to
substitute the steel core of traditional Aluminum Conductor Steel Reinforced (ACSR) type
conductors with composite materials. These new materials are stronger than steel, stable at
high temperatures, and exhibit little sag. Because the composites used do not conduct
electricity, the design uses a soft aluminum alloy, compacted together to compensate for the
current-carrying properties lost. This strategy is used for the Aluminum Conductor Composite
Reinforced (ACCR), Aluminum Conductor Composite Core (ACCC), and Aluminum Conductor
Carbon Fiber Reinforced (ACFR) type conductors. The second strategy is to continue to use
aluminum and steel alloys, but in novel ways. The designs still use steel alloys to bear most of
the tension in the line, but the alloys used can withstand higher temperatures and exhibit lower
sag. Additionally, a gap is incorporated between the aluminum strands and the steel core to
prevent the aluminum from bearing any tensile force. This configuration uses softer,
compacted aluminum for more current-carrying capacity. This strategy is used with the Invar
and Gap type conductors. Table 6 discusses these major advanced overhead conductor types,
and Table 7 provides examples of actual deployments.

Table 6. Types of Advanced Overhead Conductors

Conductor Type Description
ACCR The Aluminum Conductor Composite Reinforced type consists of an aluminum matrix
composite core reinforced with fiber. The outer layers are made of round aluminum-zirconium
wires [123]. The core has lower thermal expansion and better strength than galvanized steel.
As a result, the conductor can operate at higher temperatures and ampacities with low sag.
The round outer wire also offers large capacity increases [124].This conductor is meant to be
a replacement for ACSR and ACSS conductors.
ACCC The Aluminum Conductor Composite Core type uses a solid single-piece rod as the core,
which acts as the mechanical support for the wire. The core is made of a composite of
carbon and glass fiber and is surrounded by glass fibers. Trapezoidal strands of annealed
aluminum surround the core [123]. The increased cross-sectional area of the aluminum
strands increases the conductor’s current-carrying capacity. The core material has a high
strength-to-weight ratio. The core’s low coefficient of thermal expansion helps reduce sag
[125].
ACFR The Aluminum Conductor Carbon Fiber Reinforced type consists of a stranded carbon fiber
core surrounded by aluminum wire, aluminum-zirconium alloy, or annealed aluminum wire.
The carbon fiber core offers negligible creep, lower thermal expansion, and a high strength-
to-weight ratio. Aluminum wires around the core are arranged in a trapezoidal shape to
increase current-carrying capacity [75].

w
G(Z)TACSR – Gap-type super thermal-resistant aluminum alloy conductor steel reinforced is a common Gap-type
conductor. The conductor is built with high heat-resistant aluminum zirconium alloy and an extremely high-
strength galvanized steel core.
x
ZTACIR – The Zirconium alloy aluminum conductor Invar steel reinforced conductor is a common type of Invar
conductor. This conductor is similar to ACSR, with a high-strength Invar alloy wire core instead of steel wire.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 44

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Conductor Type Description

Invar The Invar conductor consists of a galvanized steel core surrounded by heat-resistant grease,
in turn surrounded by two layers of aluminum strands. A small gap exists between the
innermost aluminum layer and the steel core. This design allows the steel core to bear the
entire tensile load of the conductor, especially at high temperatures [123].
Gap The Gap-type conductor consists of a steel core surrounded by trapezoidal aluminum
strands. The uniqueness of this conductor lies in the fact that there exists a small gap
between the steel core and innermost aluminum layer. Hence, the core can move
independently from the rest of the conductor. Filling heat-resistant grease between the core
and the aluminum reduces friction and water penetration. At high temperatures, the
conductor is tensioned on the steel core only. The trapezoidal cross sectioning of the
aluminum strands increases the current-carrying capacity [123].

Table 7. Example Advanced Overhead Conductor Projects

Conductor Vendor/ Project
Type Participants Location Project Type Notes
ACCR [124] 3M Fargo, North Actual The Western Area Power
Dakota deployment Administration (WAPA) used an
ACCR conductor on a 1-mile, 230-
kV line. The line is frequently
exposed to high winds, extreme
cold, ice loading, and conductor
vibrations.
ACCR [124] 3M Bullhead City, Actual WAPA installed an ACCR conductor
Arizona deployment on a 20-mile, 230-kV stretch of the
Topock-Davis line. The new line
helped accommodate demand
growth in CA, NV, and AZ.
ACCC [73] CTC Global Holland, Actual Conductor installed on a 138-kV,
Michigan deployment 12-mile line.
ACCC [73] CTC Global Waukegan, Actual Conductor installed on a 138-kV,
Illinois deployment 8-mile line.
ACFR [75] Tokyo Rope Guangdong, Actual 110-kV conductor deployment.
China deployment
ACFR [75] Tokyo Rope Belo Horizonte, Actual 138-kV conductor deployment.
Brazil deployment

Superconducting cables have the potential to carry large amounts of electricity with little to no
losses. In 1967, U.S. scientists published a research paper investigating the deployment of a
Niobium Tin (Nb3Sn) direct current (DC) superconducting power line cooled to a temperature of
4 kelvins. The design envisioned a power capacity of 100 GW, transmitted over a distance of
1,000 km at a projected cost of $806 M [126]. Superconducting materials are differentiated
mainly on the basis of critical temperature operations.y Because superconductivity emerges at
extremely low temperatures, scientists have focused research on developing compounds that
super conduct at relatively higher temperatures, for more practical applications.

y
The critical temperature is the temperature at which materials transition into a superconducting state, offering
no resistance to the passage of electrical current.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 45

 Department of Energy | December 2020

The first high-temperature superconductor (HTS), a lanthanum barium copper oxide compound,
was discovered in 1986.z Examples of superconducting materials are shown in Table 8.
Table 8. Superconducting Materials and Critical Temperatures [127]
Material Critical Temperature
Niobium Titanium alloy (NbTi) 10 K
Niobium Tin (Nb3Sn) 18 K
Yttrium Barium Copper Oxygen (YBCO) 92 K
Bismuth Strontium Calcium Copper Oxygen (BSCCO) 110 K
Magnesium Boride (MgB2) 39 K

DOE’s HTS program helped to accelerate the development of this technology, fostering public-
private partnerships with researchers, manufacturers, and utilities to realize power system
applications [76]. Current state-of-the-art technologies use two types of HTS wire: Bismuth–
Strontium–Calcium–Copper–Oxygen (BSCCO), also known as first-generation (1G) wire, and
Rare earth–Barium–Copper Oxide (ReBCO), also known as second-generation (2G) wire. Most
research efforts are focused on 2G wire because it exhibits better electrical performance, is
stronger, and requires a less costly and complex cooling system.

Despite these advancements, there have been limited commercial HTS cable deployments.
Utility acceptance of HTS technology would be contingent on multiple demonstration projects
lasting at least ten years [76]. Such projects are expensive, and continued financial support is
vital for success. In 2016, EPRI observed that “no HTS cable project without government
support has yet happened” [83]. Meanwhile, state and National governments in Japan, Korea,
China, Germany, and Russia have continued devoting resources to advance HTS research [128].
Table 9 provides examples of actual HTS cable deployments worldwide.

Table 9. Example HTS Cable Projects [129]

Project
Conductor Type Vendor Location Project Type Notes
High-Temperature Nexans Long Island, Actual 600-meter line operated by Long Island
Superconductor New York deployment Power Authority at 138-kV with a rated
(HTS) capacity of 574 MVA.
HTS South Korean Jeju Island, Actual 1-kilometer, 154-kV AC line with a rated
Government Korea deployment capacity of 600 MVA and a 500-meter,
80-kV DC cable.
HTS Southwire Columbus, Cable system 200-meter, 13.2-kV, 69 MVA cable was
Ohio was deployed installed as a link between the secondary
from 2006– of a 138-kV, 13.2-kV step-down
2012 transformer and 13.2-kV substation bus
for American Electric Power.

z
Early discoveries of superconductivity involved cooling materials to extremely low temperatures (of the order of
tens of Kelvin, or −441°F). Scientists have made incremental breakthroughs in developing materials that attain
superconductivity at higher temperatures (which are still well below 32°F). Hence, these new superconductors are
named high-temperature superconductors.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 46

 Department of Energy | December 2020

Project
Conductor Type Vendor Location Project Type Notes
HTS Korea Electric Yongin, Actual 1-kilometer, 23-kV cable connecting
Power Co., LS South Korea deployment Heungdeok and Singal substations.
Cable Co.
HTS Nexans Essen, Actual The project was aimed at replacing aging
Germany deployment 110-kV, 10-kV T-D infrastructure with 10-
kV HTS cables. The rated power and
current of the cable are 40 MVA and 2.3
kA, respectively.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 47

 Department of Energy | December 2020

VIII. Bibliography
[1] Constable, G., et al, A Century of Innovation: Twenty Engineering Achievements That
Transformed Our Lives, Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press, 2003.
[2] Harris Williams & Co., "Transmission & distribution infrastructure," 2010. [Online].
Available:
https://www.harriswilliams.com/sites/default/files/industry_reports/finalpercent20TD.
pdf. [Accessed 15 January 2019].
[3] U.S. Department of Energy, "Large power transformers and the U.S. electric grid," 2014.
[Online]. Available:
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/04/f15/LPTStudyUpdate-040914.pdf.
[Accessed 15 January 2019].
[4] U.S. Department of Energy, "QER report, appendix C: Energy transmission, storage, and
distribution infrastructure," 2015. [Online]. Available:
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/07/f24/ElectricityAppendix.pdf.
[Accessed 4 June 2020].
[5] Section 215 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. § 824o.
[6] U.S. Energy Information Administration, "Utilities continue to increase spending on
transmission infrastructure," 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34892. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[7] J. Pfeifenberger, J. Chang and J. Tsoukalis, "Investment trends and fundamentals in U.S.
transmission and electricity infrastructure," The Brattle Group, 2015.
[8] J. McCall and T. Goodwin, "Dynamic Line Rating as a Means to Enhance Transmission
Grid Resilience," in CIGRE U.S. National Committee 2015 Grid of the Future Symposium,
2015.
[9] U.S. Department of Energy, "Transmission constraints and congestion in the Western
and Eastern interconnections 2009-2012," 2014.
[10] I. Penn, "Why Wall Street gets a cut of your power bill," Los Angeles Times, 15 December
2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-electricity-
capacityinvestments. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[11] U.S. Department of Energy, "Annual U.S. transmission data review," 2018.
[12] H. Haibo and J. Yan, "Cyber-physical attacks and defences in the smart grid: a survey,"
IET Cyber-Physical Systems: Theory & Applications, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 13-27, 2016.
[13] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, "Grid reliability and resilience pricing," 2018.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 48

 Department of Energy | December 2020

[14] S. Uski-Joutsenvuo and R. Pasonen, "Maximising power line transmission capability by

employing dynamic line ratings—technical survey and applicability in Finland. Accessed
April 2020. Available online:," [Online]. Available:
http://sgemfinalreport.fi/files/D5.1.55percent20-
percent20Dynamicpercent20linepercent20rating.pdf. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[15] A. Michiorri et al., "Forecasting for dynamic line rating," [Online]. Available: https://hal-
mines-paristech.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01199238/document. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[16] J. McCall, "Next generation dynamic line rating provides strong economic benefits.,"
[Online]. Available:
https://electricenergyonline.com/energy/magazine/970/article/Next-Generation-
Dynamic-Line-Rating-Provides-Strong-Economic-Benefits.htm. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[17] U.S. Department of Energy, "2019 report to Congress on dynamic line rating," June
2019. [Online]. Available:
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/08/f66/Congressional_DLR_Report_June
2019_final_508_0.pdf.
[18] S. Murphy et al., "Simulating the economic impact of a dynamic line rating project in a
regional transmission operator (RTO) environment," 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/4412998/CIGREpercent20GOTFpercent202018percent2
0NGNpercent20-percent20PJMpercent20AEPpercent20LineVisionpercent20-
percent20Final.pdf. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[19] B. Mehraban et al., "An analysis on the economic impacts of dynamic line ratings on a
congested transmission line in southwest power pool," 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/4412998/CIGREpercent20GOTFpercent202018percent2
0-percent20SPPpercent20AEPpercent20LineVisionpercent20-percent20Final.pdf.
[Accessed 3 June 2020].
[20] Southwest Power Pool, "SPP state of the market report," 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://www.spp.org/documents/59861/2018percent20annualpercent20statepercent2
0ofpercent20thepercent20marketpercent20report.pdf. [Accessed 5 June 2020].
[21] California Public Utilities Commission, "SED incident investigation report for 2018 Camp
Fire with attachments," [Online]. Available:
cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/12/03/i1906015.appendix.a.sed.camp.fire.investigation.
report.redacted.pdf. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[22] S. K. D. DiSavino, "'Bomb cyclone' hits U.S. East Coast energy, power supply," 4 January
2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-weather-
energy/bomb-cyclone-hits-u-s-east-coast-energy-power-supply-idUSKBN1ET1GS.
[Accessed June 25 2020].
[23] J. Kemp, "U.S. power grid survived polar vortex, but only just: Kemp," 3 October 2014.
[Online]. Available: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-power-weather-kemp/u-s-

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 49

 Department of Energy | December 2020

power-grid-survived-polar-vortex-but-only-just-kemp-idUSKCN0HQ4TB20141003.
[Accessed 25 June 2020].
[24] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, "Electric power markets," [Online]. Available:
https://www.ferc.gov/market-assessments/mkt-electric/overview.asp.
[25] D. Tom Rizy and P. Ohodnicki, "Sensing and measurement technology roadmap: devices
including communications and data analytics requirements," GRID Modernization
Laboratory Consortium, 2019.
[26] A.A. Mazi, B.F. Wollenberg, and M.H. Hesse, "Corrective control of power system flows
by line and bus-bar switching," IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 1, no. 3, p. 258–
265, 1986.
[27] A.G. Bakirtzis and A.P.S. Meliopoulos, "Incorporation of switching operations in power
system corrective control computations," IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 2,
no. 3, p. 669–675, 1987.
[28] V. Vittal and W. Shao, "Corrective switching algorithm for relieving overloads and
voltage violations," IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 20, no. 4, p. 1877–1885,
2005.
[29] PJM, "Energy management system (EMS) model updates and qualtiy assurance (QA)," in
PJM Manual 3A, 2019, pp. 51-53.
[30] P. Ruiz and J. Caspary, "Webinar: transmission topology optimization: a software
solution for improving congestion management," 2019. [Online]. Available:
https://www.esig.energy/event/webinar-transmission-topology-optimization-a-
software-solution-for-improving-congestion-management/. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[31] S. Oren et al., Optimal transmission switching: when economic efficiency and FTR
markets collide, Toulouse, France: Presented at Economics of Energy Markets
Conference, Jan. 28–29, 2010, 2010.
[32] P.A. Ruiz and J. Caspary, "Webinar: transmission topology optimization: a software
solution for improving congestion management," 2019. [Online]. Available:
https://www.esig.energy/event/webinar-transmission-topology-optimization-a-
software-solution-for-improving-congestion-management/. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[33] Ruiz et al., "Transmission topology optimization: pilot study to support congestion
management and ice buildup mitigation," [Online]. Available:
http://newgridinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Topology-Optimization_SPP-
Technology-Expo_20181115_FINAL.pdf. [Accessed 4 June 2020].
[34] P.A. Ruiz et al., Topology control algorithms (TCA): simulations in PJM with AC Modeling,
Washington, DC: FERC Tech. Conf. on Increasing Market Efficiency through Improved
Software, Docket AD10-12-005, June 2014, 2014.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 50

 Department of Energy | December 2020

[35] P.A. Ruiz et al., "Transmission topology optimization: a software solution for improving
congestion management," in Energy Systems Integration Group webinar, 19 June 2019,
2019.
[36] National Grid, "Network innovation allowance 2016/17," 2017.
[37] Brattle, "Brattle study for National Grid shows topology optimization can help relieve
major transmission constraints in Great Britain," 2017.
[38] E. B. Fisher, R. P. O’Neill, and M. C. Ferris, "Optimal transmission switching," IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 23, no. 3, p. 1346–1355, 2008.
[39] K. W. Hedman, R. P. O’Neill, E. B. Fisher, and S. S. Oren, "Optimal transmission
switching—sensitivity analysis and extensions," IEEE Transactions Power Systems, vol.
23, no. 3, p. 1469–1479, 2008.
[40] X. Li, P. Balasubramanian, M. Sahraei-Ardakani, M. Abdi-Khorsand, K. W. Hedman and R.
Podmore, "Real-time contingency analysis with corrective transmission switching," IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 32, no. 4, p. 2604–2617, 2017.
[41] S. Oren et al., Optimal transmission switching: when economic efficiency and FTR
markets collide, Toulouse, France: Economics of Energy Markets Conference, 28–29
January 2010, 2010.
[42] K. W. Hedman, S. S. Oren, and R. P. O'Neill, "Revenue adequacy constrained optimal
transmission switching," in 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences, pp. 1-10., Kauai, HI, 2011.
[43] G.Huang, W. Wang, and J. An, "Stability issues of smart grid transmission line switching,"
in IFAC Proceedings, vol. 47, Issue 3, 2014, pages 7305–7310, 2014.
[44] X. Li, P. Balasubramanian, M. Sahraei-Ardakani, M. Abdi-Khorsand, K. W. Hedman and R.
Podmore, "Real-time contingency analysis with corrective transmission switching," IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 32, no. 4, p. 2604–2617, 2017.
[45] PJM, "Joint and Common Market: Michigan-Ontario phase angle regulator (PAR) control
study update," [Online]. Available: https://www.pjm.com/-/media/committees-
groups/stakeholder-meetings/pjm-miso-joint-common/20170228/20170228-item-06a-
michigan-ontario-pars-control-study-update.ashx. [Accessed 2020].
[46] NY Power Authority, "Marcy South Series Compensation Project," [Online]. Available:
https://www.nypa.gov/-/media/nypa/documents/document-
library/transmission/msscfacts.pdf. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[47] ARPA-E, "GENI program overview," [Online]. Available: https://arpa-
e.energy.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/GENI_ProgramOverview.pdf.
[Accessed 4 June 2020].

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 51

 Department of Energy | December 2020

[48] U.S. Department of Energy, "TRAC program vision and framework," [Online]. Available:
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/06/f75/TRACpercent20Programpercent2
0Visionpercent20andpercent20Framework.pdf. [Accessed 25 June 2020].
[49] Smart Wires, "SmartValve," [Online]. Available:
https://www.smartwires.com/smartvalve/. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[50] A. Del Rosso, Benefits and value of new power flow controllers, EPRI, 2018.
[51] M. Kormos, Grid-enhancing technologies, FERC Docket No. AD19-19-000, 2019.
[52] D.B. Patton, Efficient incentives for grid-enhancing technologies, FERC Docket No. AD19-
19-000, 2019.
[53] C. Glazer, Grid-enhancing technologies, FERC Docket No. AD19-19-000, 2019.
[54] W. Long and S. Nilsson, "HVDC transmission: yesterday and today," IEEE Power and
Energy Magazine, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 22-31, 2007.
[55] R. Rudervall, J. P. Charpentier, and R. Sharma, "High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC)
transmission systems technology review paper," 2000.
[56] S. Dodds et al, HVDC VSC (HVDC Light) transmission – operating experiences, Presented
at CIGRE Technical Exhibition 2010, Paris, France, Aug. 22-27, 2010, 2010.
[57] Bonneville Power Administration, "Direct current line still hot after 40 years," 2010.
[58] "TransWest Express," [Online]. Available: http://www.transwestexpress.net. [Accessed
25 June 2020].
[59] G. B. Express, "Grain Belt Express: Moving energy from source to market," [Online].
Available: https://grainbeltexpress.com. [Accessed 25 June 2020].
[60] "SOO Green HVDC Link," [Online]. Available: https://www.soogreenrr.com/about.
[Accessed 25 June 2020].
[61] U.S. Department of Energy, "Applications for High-Voltage Direct Current Transmission
technologies," 2013.
[62] A. MacDonald, E., C.T.M. Clack, A. Alexander, A. Dunbar, J. Wilczak, and Y. Xie., "Future
cost-competitive electricity systems and their impact on US CO2 emissions –
supplementary information," Nature Climate Change, 2016.
[63] P. Rodriguez and K. Rouzbehi, "Multi-terminal DC grids: challenges and prospects," J.
Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy , vol. 5, pp. 515-523, 2017.
[64] Siemens, "HVDC classic – low losses.," 2017. [Online]. Available:
https://www.energy.siemens.com/hq/en/power-transmission/hvdc/hvdc-
classic.htm#content=Lowpercent20Losses. [Accessed August 2017].

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 52

 Department of Energy | December 2020

[65] ABB, "Special report: 60 years of HVDC," ABB Review, p. 1–72, 2014.
[66] U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force, "Final report on the August 14, 2003,
blackout in the United States and Canada: causes and recommendations," 2004.
[67] M. Brenna, F. Foiadelli, M. Longo, and D. Zaninelli, "Improvement of wind energy
production through HVDC systems," Energies , vol. 10, p. 157, 2017.
[68] U.S. Department of Energy, "Solid state power substation technology roadmap,"
[Online]. Available:
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/06/f75/2020percent20Solidpercent20St
atepercent20Powerpercent20Substationpercent20Technologypercent20Roadmap.pdf.
[Accessed 25 June 2020].
[69] U.S. Energy Information Administration, "Assessing HVDC transmission for impacts of
non-dispatchable generation," June 2018.
[70] D.V. Hertem and M. Ghandhari, "Multi-terminal VSC HVDC for the European supergrid:
obstacles," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 3156-3163,
June 2010.
[71] Å Ekström, et al., "Design and testing of an HVDC circuit breaker," 1976.
[72] C.M. Franck, "HVDC circuit breakers: a review identifying future research needs," IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 998-1007, 2011.
[73] CTC Global, "ACCC conductor installations," [Online]. Available:
https://www.ctcglobal.com/project-map/.
[74] A. Russell, "3M ACCR presentation," 2014. [Online]. Available:
https://www.ieee.hr/_download/repository/Allan_Russell_3M_ACCR_percent28Alumin
um_Conductor_Composite_Reinforcedpercent29_-
_Proven_Solutions_to_Increase_Capacity.pdf.
[75] Tokyo Rope, "HTLS conductor installation records," [Online]. Available:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1IaorOymzoWPuB40J4rHFACal4MEjd6qZ
&ll=44.03076990804561percent2C54.0846184752325&z=3.
[76] U.S. DOE, "High temperature superconductivity: a history of success," 2015.
[77] U.S. Department of Energy, "Plugging America into the future of power: project fact
sheet," 2008. [Online]. Available:
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/oeprod/DocumentsandMedia/Albany__03_05
_08.pdf. [Accessed 4 June 2020].
[78] U.S. Department of Homeland Security, "DHS science and technology directorate
resilient electric grid (REG)," [Online]. Available:

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 53

 Department of Energy | December 2020

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Resilient-Electric-Grid-REG-508-
v2.2.pdf. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[79] AMC, "AMSC and ComEd Agree to Install Resilient Electric Grid System in Chicago,"
[Online]. Available: https://ir.amsc.com/news-releases/news-release-details/amsc-and-
comed-agree-install-resilient-electric-grid-system. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[80] R. Elberg, "Advanced overhead conductors: changing the value equation for utility
transmission line upgrade and new build projects," CTC Global, 2018.
[81] D. Bryant, "ACCC conductor can reduce line losses and why everyone should care," 2017.
[Online]. Available: https://www.ctcglobal.com/blog/accc-conductor-reduces-line-
losses-everyone-care/. [Accessed 4 June 2020].
[82] U.S. Energy Information Administration, "Annual energy outlook," 2020. [Online].
Available: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[83] Xcel Energy, "Overhead vs. Underground: Information about burying high-voltage
transmission lines," 2014. [Online]. Available:
https://www.xcelenergy.com/staticfiles/xe/Corporate/Corporatepercent20PDFs/Overhe
adVsUnderground_FactSheet.pdf. [Accessed 25 June 2020].
[84] S. Eckroad, "Technical analysis and assessment of resilient technologies for the electric
grid: task 2—cost and commercialization assessment and market analysis," Electric
Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, 2016.
[85] A. Al-Taie, L. Graber, and S.V. Pamidi, "Technical challenges and potential solutions for
cross-country multi-terminal superconducting DC power cables," IOP Conference Series:
Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 279, no. 012034, 2017.
[86] H. Thomas et al., "Superconducting transmission lines – Sustainable electric energy
transfer with higher public acceptance?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,
vol. 55, pp. 59-72, 2015.
[87] H. Hirai et al., "Neon turbo-brayton cycle refrigerator for HTS power machines," AIP
Conference Proceedings, vol. 1434, no. 1, pp. 1672-1679, 2012.
[88] H. H. e. al., "Development of a turbine-compressor for 10 kW class neon turbo-Brayton
refrigerator," AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1573, pp. 1236-1241, 2014.
[89] Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Promoting transmission investment through
pricing reform, 2012.
[90] N. o. P. R. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Electric transmission incentives policy
under Section 219 of the Federal Power Act, Docket No. RM20-10-000, 2020.
[91] Ofgem, "Network regulation – the “RIIO” model," [Online]. Available:
https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/network-regulation-riio-model. [Accessed 2 June 2020].

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 54

 Department of Energy | December 2020

[92] AEE, "Comments of Advanced Energy Economy, Docket No. PL19-3-000," [Online].
Available: https://elibrary.ferc.gov/IDMWS/file_list.asp?document_id=14780619.
[Accessed 25 June 2020].
[93] A. E. Regulator, Final electricity transmission network service providers service target
performance incentive scheme, version 4.1, 2014.
[94] "WATT Coalition Initial Comments, PL19-3-000," 26 June 2019. [Online]. Available:
https://elibrary.ferc.gov/IDMWS/file_list.asp?document_id=14780494. [Accessed 25
June 2020].
[95] R. Gramlich, Bringing the grid to life: white paper on the benefits to customers of
transmission management technologies, Working for Advanced Transmission
Technologies (WATT) Coalition, 2018.
[96] S. Murphy, N. Dumitriu, J. Marmillo, N. Pinney, and B. Mehraban, Simulating the
economic impact of a dynamic line rating project in a regional transmission operator
(RTO) environment, Presented at the CIGRE U.S. National Committee 2018 Grid of the
Future Symposium, Reston, VA, October 28-31, 2018.
[97] J. Johnson et al., "Dynamic line rating, Oncor Electric Delivery Smart Grid Program,"
Office of Scientific and Technical Information Technical Reports, 1 August 2013.
[98] B. Mehraban et al., An analysis on the economic impacts of dynamic line ratings on a
congested transmission line in Southwest Power Pool, Presented at the CIGRE U.S.
National Committee 2018 Grid of the Future Symposium, Reston, VA, October 28-31,
2018.
[99] J. Verga, N. Pinney, and J. Marmillo, Incorporating dynamic line ratings to alleviate
transmission congestion, increase wind resource utilization, and improve power market
efficiency, Presented at CIGRE US National Committee 2016 Grid of the Future
Symposium, Philadelphia, PA. Oct. 30-Nov. 1, 2016.
[100] A. Phillips, Evaluation of instrumentation and dynamic thermal ratings for overhead
lines, Office of Scientific and Technical Information, U.S. Department of Energy, 2013.
[101] PacifiCorp, "Smart Grid Annual Report," 1 July 2015. [Online]. Available:
https://pscdocs.utah.gov/electric/15docs/1503563/267287RMPSmartGridMonitorAnnR
ep20157-1-2015.pdf. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[102] F. Skivee et al., "Integration of 2 days-ahead capacity forecast to manage Belgian energy
imports," 2016. [Online]. Available: http://www.ampacimon.com/wp-
content/uploads/2016/09/Cigre_C2_PS1__20161.pdf.
[103] Northern Ireland Electricity PLC, Application paper for the approval of additional capex
in RP4, 23, 2011.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 55

 Department of Energy | December 2020

[104] B. Bhattarai et al., Transmission line ampacity improvements of AltaLink Wind Plant
Overhead tie-lines using weather-based dynamic line rating, IEEE PES General Meeting,
Idaho National Laboratory, July 2017.
[105] ARPA-E, "Decision-support software for grid operators," [Online]. Available:
https://arpa-e.energy.gov/?q=slick-sheet-project/decision-support-software-grid-
operators. [Accessed 1 April 2020].
[106] P. Ruiz, Transmission topology optimization: simulation of impacts in PJM day-ahead
markets, Washington, DC: Presented at FERC Tech. Conf. on Increasing Market Efficiency
through Improved Software, Docket AD10-12-005, 2014.
[107] T. B. Tsuchida and R. Gramlich, "Improving transmission operation with advanced
technologies: a review of deployment experience and analysis of incentives," The Brattle
Group, 2019, p. 19.
[108] P.A. Ruiz, Transmission topology optimization: operations and market applications and
case studies, Presented at ERCOT Demand Side Working Group Meeting, Austin, TX, Dec.
6, 2016.
[109] ARPA, "Green electric network integration," [Online]. Available: https://arpa-
e.energy.gov/?q=programs/geni. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[110] ARPA, "Smart Wires (GENI), developing technology to improve electricity transmission
capacity," [Online]. Available: https://arpa-e.energy.gov/?q=impact-sheet/smart-wires-
geni. [Accessed 4 June 2020].
[111] ARPA, "Grid modernization with power flow controller," [Online]. Available:
https://arpa-e.energy.gov/?q=impact-sheet/varentec-geni. [Accessed 3 June 2020].
[112] W. Long and S. Nilsson, "HVDC transmission: yesterday and today," IEEE Power & Energy
Magazine, vol. 5, no. 2, p. 22–31, 2007.
[113] L. Weimers, "HVDC light – a new technology for a better environment," IEEE Power
Engineering Review, vol. 18, no. 8, pp. 19-20, 1998.
[114] ABB Québec, "New England: The first large scale multiterminal HVDC transmission in the
world to be upgraded," 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://new.abb.com/systems/hvdc/references/quebec-new-england. [Accessed 4 June
2020].
[115] ABB, "Rio Madeira – The Longest Transmission Link in the World."," n.d.. [Online].
Available: http://new.abb.com/systems/hvdc/references/rio-madeira. [Accessed 3 June
2020].
[116] ABB, "Changji-Guquan UHVDC link 12,000 megawatts of electricity over 3,000 kilometers
at 1.1 million volts, setting new world records on voltage level, transmission capacity
and distance," [Online]. Available:

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 56

 Department of Energy | December 2020

https://new.abb.com/systems/hvdc/references/changji-guquan-uhvdc-link. [Accessed 4
June 2020].
[117] ABB, "ABB wins orders of over $300 million for world's first 1100 kV UHVDC power link
in China," 2016. [Online]. Available: https://new.abb.com/news/detail/13922/abb-wins-
orders-of-over-300-million-for-worlds-first-1100-kv-uhvdc-power-link-in-china.
[Accessed 4 June 2020].
[118] R. Anshika, 3 Main Types of HVDC Links | Transmission | Electrical Engineering.
[119] Y. Murata et al., "Development of High Voltage DC-XLPE Cable System," 2013. [Online].
Available: https://global-sei.com/technology/tr/bn76/pdf/76-09.pdf. [Accessed 4 June
2020].
[120] H. Kirkham et. al., "An introduction to high voltage DC networks," U.S. Department of
Energy, PNNL-23273, 2014.
[121] A. Giannakis and D. Peftitsis, "MVDC distribution grids and potential applications: future
trends and protection challenges," 2018.
[122] G.F. Reed, B. Grainger, A. Sparacino, E. Taylor, and Z. Mao, "Ship to grid: medium-
voltage DC concepts in theory and practice," IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, vol. 10,
no. 6, pp. 70-79, 2012.
[123] EPRI, Demonstration of advanced conductors for overhead transmission lines, CEC-500-
2013-030, Palo Alto, 2008.
[124] 3M, "3M aluminum conductor composite reinforced (ACCR) high-capacity transmission
conductor," [Online]. Available:
https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/478270O/3mtm-accr-technical-summary-
english-units.pdf. [Accessed 4 June 2020].
[125] CTC Global, "ACCC Conductor," [Online]. Available: https://www.ctcglobal.com/accc-
conductor.
[126] R. L. Garwin and J. Matisoo, "Superconducting lines for the transmission of large
amounts of electrical power over great distances," in Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 55, no.
4, pp. 538-548, April 1967, 1967.
[127] EPRI, "Summary report: technical analysis and assessment of resilient technologies for
the electric grid: high-temperature superconductivity," Palo Alto, 2017.
[128] EPRI, "Strategic intelligence update: superconductivity for power delivery applications,"
Palo Alto, 2015.
[129] EPRI, "Superconducting power equipment: technology watch," Palo Alto, 2012.
[130] FERC, "Response of the New York Independent System Operator, Inc," 2018.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 57

 Department of Energy | December 2020

[131] S. U.-J. &. R. Pasonen, "Sanna Uski-Joutsenvuo & Riku Pasonen, Maximising power line
transmission capability by employing dynamic line ratings—technical survey and
applicability in Finland. Accessed April 2020. Available online:," [Online]. Available:
https://www.vttresearch.com/sites/default/files/jul.
[132] U. DOE, "Dynamic Line Rating. Report to Congress, June 2019. Available online:,"
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/08/f66/Congressional_DLR_Report_June
2019_final_508_0.pdf .
[133] Southwest Power Pool , "SPP State of the Market Report, 2018. Available online:,"
[Online]. Available:
https://www.spp.org/documents/59861/2018percent20annualpercent20statepercent2
0ofpercent20thepercent20marketpercent20report.pdf..
[134] P.A. Ruiz, et al., "Transmission topology optimization: a software solution for improving
congestion management,” presented at Energy Systems Integration Group webinar," in
Presented at Energy Systems Integration Group webinar, 19 June 2019., 2019.
[135] Tokyo Rope, "HTLS Conductor Installation Records August 26-27, 2015".
[136] P.A. Ruiz et al., "Transmission topology optimization: a software solution for improving
congestion management," in Presented at Energy Systems Integration Group webinar,
2019.
[137] J. F. Hauer et al., "Appendix F: Advanced transmission technologies," National Grid
Study, Issue Papers, May 2002.

Advanced Transmission Technologies | Page 58