| Literature DB >> 36015912 |
Li Bin1, Muhammad Shahzad2, Haseeb Javed2, Hafiz Abdul Muqeet3, Muhammad Naveed Akhter4, Rehan Liaqat5, Muhammad Majid Hussain6.
Abstract
Current energy systems face multiple problems related to inflation in energy prices, reduction of fossil fuels, and greenhouse gas emissions which are disturbing the comfort zone of energy consumers and the affordability of power for large commercial customers. These kinds of problems can be alleviated with the help of optimal planning of demand response policies and with distributed generators in the distribution system. The objective of this article is to give a strategic proposition of an energy management system for a campus microgrid (µG) to minimize the operating costs and to increase the self-consuming energy of the green distributed generators (DGs). To this end, a real-time based campus is considered that currently takes provision of its loads from the utility grid only. According to the proposed given scenario, it will contain solar panels and a wind turbine as non-dispatchable DGs while a diesel generator is considered as a dispatchable DG. It also incorporates an energy storage system with optimal sizing of BESS to tackle the multiple disturbances that arise from solar radiation. The resultant problem of linear mathematics was simulated and plotted in MATLAB with mixed-integer linear programming. Simulation results show that the proposed given model of energy management (EMS) minimizes the grid electricity costs by 668.8 CC/day ($) which is 36.6% of savings for the campus microgrid. The economic prognosis for the campus to give an optimum result for the UET Taxila, Campus was also analyzed. The general effect of a medium-sized solar PV installation on carbon emissions and energy consumption costs was also determined. The substantial environmental and economic benefits compared to the present situation have prompted the campus owners to invest in the DGs and to install large-scale energy storage.Entities:
Keywords: batteries; campus microgrid; distributed generation; energy storage system; prosumer market; smart grid
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36015912 PMCID: PMC9416364 DOI: 10.3390/s22166150
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1Proposed Conceptual model of EMS.
Figure 2Proposed architecture of the system.
Figure 3Standard deviation and mean value curves.
Figure 4Proposed methodology of the given solution.
Optimal Sizing System Parameters.
| Parameters | Value | Parameters | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 2000 kW |
| 800 kWh |
|
| 2000 kW |
| −1000 kW |
|
| 800 kW |
| −800 kW |
|
| 90% |
| 0.95 |
|
| 50% | Battery Lifetime (LTY) | 10 |
| BESS Fixed-price | 70.875 | SOHM | 0.6 |
Electricity price distribution per unit.
| Tariff Pricing | |
|---|---|
| Timing (Hours) | Unit Prices ($) |
| 12:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. | 0.10 |
| 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. | 0.138 |
| 11:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. | 0.10 |
Figure 5Load pattern behavior of campus.
Figure 6Scenario 1(b): Energy exchange with the power grid.
Figure 7Scenario 1(c): Energy exchange with the grid.
Multiple case results.
| Cases | Only Grid | PV | ESS | DG | Wind | Energy Import by Grid | Electricity Generated from Prosumer (kWh | Grid Electricity Net Cost/Day ($) * | CC ** ($/ | Electricity Net Cost without CC/Day ($) 1 | Electricity Net Cost CC/Day ($) | LCOE ($/kWh) | % Saving |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | (C = B − A) | |||||||||||
| (a) | ✓ | × | × | × | × | 141,72.5 | - | 1430.8 | - | 1430.8 | 1430.8 | 0.101 | - |
| (b) | ✓ | ✓ | × | × | × | 5548.8 | 8623.7 | 610.7 | 165 | 923.5 | 758.5 | 0.055 | 42.9 |
| (c) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | × | × | 5548.8 | 8623.7 | 711.5 | 165 | 899.9 | 734.9 | 0.056 | 41.2 |
| (d) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | × | 4784.2 | 8623.7 | 768.2 | 155 | 835.5 | 680.6 | 0.058 | 37.4 |
| (e) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 4643.2 | 8893.9 | 546.4 | 145 | 813.8 | 668.8 | 0.060 | 36.6 |
* This only covers the cost of grid power, not the costs of additional components such as PV, ESS, WT, and/or DGen. 1 The LCOE for every scenario is used to calculate this cost. PV’s LCOE is estimated to be 0.048 $/kWh [7]. The cost of installation of DGen and ESS are partially compensated by contributing 0.15 $/kWh and 0.06 $/kWh, correspondingly, to the suggested provided model, which already includes the O&M costs of ESS and/or DGen in different cases [7]. ** If the prosumer is listed within the carbon development mechanism (CDM), he/she will receive a carbon credit (CC) [7].
Figure 8Scenario 1(d): Energy exchange with the grid.
Figure 9Scenario 1(e): Energy exchange with the grid.
Figure 10Electricity net cost analysis in multiple scenarios.
Figure 11Net present cost for different components used in the system.
Comparison of the existing works compared with the proposed method.
| Ref. | Year | Application | Technique | Remarks | Savings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | 2018 | Campus µG | MILP | ESS Degradation cost, Peak demand | 5.32% |
| [ | 2018 | Residential Level | MILP | Frequency regulation | 7% |
| [ | 2019 | Residential µG | LP | Grid outage | 16% |
| [ | 2020 | Campus µG | MILNP | Electrical peak mitigation | 23% |
| [ | 2021 | Campus µG | MILP | ESS Degradation cost, Peak demand | 5.27% |
| Proposed Model | 2022 | Campus µG | MILP | Self-consumption, ESS Degradation, Demand response, Optimal sizing & Economic analysis | 36.3% |