The power reform should aim at a safe economy

Some experts said that the power system has a natural "monopoly", this is not accurate, it should be said that the power system has a natural overall control. The overall management and control are aimed at achieving the safety and economy of the two goals. Furthermore, there is "high quality", ie, high power quality. Monopoly is a negative concept in the economics category. The overall management and control is the concept of the power system dispatch and operation category.

The purpose of overall management and control is to achieve the goal of safety and economic operation. Power plants and power grids are like our heads and bodies and cannot be separated. The word "separate factory network" seems to be very concise, but it is not accurate. Accurately speaking, it should be "factory network division, unified scheduling," the first four words and the last four words should be mentioned, are indispensable, this is determined by the properties of the power system itself, the factory network is really separated There is no power system. "Separation of plant and network" is essentially a separate operation and management, but it is still necessary to emphasize unified scheduling, otherwise it will affect the safety and economic operation of the power system.

For the power reform, in my knowledge area, I do not agree to dismantle the inseparable power system, including power plants, power grids, and users, and that would not be a system. The reform of the power system is not to divide a large system into small systems. Why reform? The reformer, new, is to change it better. Safe and economic dual excellence is the goal of power system reform. The power system is like a human being. It is a dynamic living body. It cannot be split artificially. Otherwise, problems will arise. There must be a unified large-scale power system, and under this scale, safe and economical optimization of dispatch and control can be achieved. Artificially cutting the power system into a number of small systems is not conducive to unified scheduling and management, and it is likely to affect the realization of the goal of safe and economical operation of the power system. In the end, Yu Yumin is unfavorable. The foothold of the reform should be the establishment of a safe and economical dual-optimal power system, and a hierarchical, hierarchical and unified control system must be established.

The United States had emphasized the operation of the power market, and the large power system was composed of a number of independent power companies. In operation, independent companies can only rely on contracts and agreements. Just think, how can a real-time scientific unified dispatch occur when a major emergency occurs? How to ensure the safety and stability of the power system? This is the drawback of the lack of unified accident handling and control capabilities in the U.S. power system. Do we still need to copy it?

China's power system reform should continue to adhere to the guideline of reform and development, earnestly summarize China's past experience in power reform practices, keep a clear-headed view of the trend of international power reform, and proceed from the reality of the development of China's power industry, scientifically improve its reform strategy, and take Chinese characteristics. The road to sustainable development of electricity.

China has long been developing and constructing a large power grid, emphasizing overall management and control, and establishing a five-level management and control system. The biggest advantage is that it can optimize the allocation of energy resources throughout the country, so that the entire system exists to achieve optimization. It is necessary to use development perspectives to take the electric power system reform forward a few more steps and find out the target. Only by doing so can electric power reform ultimately benefit the country and the people.

From the perspective of power system science, I do not quite support the idea of ​​separation and distribution. From the perspective of development trends, the distribution network will play an increasingly important role in the future of power system security and economic dual optimization. For example, the waste heat power generation problem of non-electric companies. Utilizing these waste heat as much as possible can generate huge energy-saving and emission reduction benefits. For another example, such technologies as wind power, rooftop photovoltaics, microgrids, and electric vehicles, as well as from the “demand response” to the intelligent demand control, are mostly in distribution networks.

After such new technologies are available, users in distribution networks and distribution networks will become an important part of the power system to achieve safe and economical operation and balance the peak-to-valley difference of the power system. Its important role will become more and more obvious. . If the allocation of resources is separated, it is unfavorable for us to make full use of and optimize the implementation of such a wide range of new energy and new user strategies. If it is impossible to unify the optimization of the dispatching network, the power system will lose a large part of the power to the demand side and it will be difficult to say that it will benefit the economic operation of the power system.

I suggest that the government should listen to the opinions of experts in various fields. Including opinions from power system experts and economic management experts. Having fully listened to and analyzed these opinions, I believe that we can always find a more scientific and reasonable reform way and find a visionary, sustainable, and time-testable reform program.

Marketization is only a means, and it is not a panacea, not a final goal. I believe that a reform with a clear goal, not a reform that will change for the sake of change, will bring a high-security, high-efficiency power system with Chinese characteristics. The state and the people will benefit from it.