4.7 Article

Integration of Smart Energy Hubs in Distribution Networks Under Uncertainties and Demand Response Concept

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER SYSTEMS
卷 34, 期 1, 页码 566-574

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TPWRS.2018.2867648

关键词

Distribution network; smart energy hubs (S. E. Hubs); hybrid scenario-based/interval/information gap decision theory (IGDT) method; epsilon-constrainedmethod; fuzzy decision making approach; demand side management programs (DSMPs)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multienergy systems are flexible energy systems that can benefit from energy resources to supply different energy demands. Due to the capabilities of multienergy systems in generating different energy carriers, these systems have been rapidly expanded in power systems. After restructuring in power system in recent years and appearance of competent energy markets, energy systems operated within such environments have been usually exposed to uncertainties of various parameters, such as price, demand, etc. In this paper, a novel optimization framework based on hybrid scenario-based/interval/information gap decision theory method is developed to investigate the optimal operation of smart energy hubs (S. E. Hubs) subject to economic priorities, technical constraints of the distribution network and uncertainties. Considering energy hubs equipped to smart facilities, demand-side management programs including price response and load response services have been available to motivate electrical consumers to revise their consumption pattern in order to satisfy economic priorities of energy hubs. By using the results of employed hybrid uncertainty modeling approach, the operator of S. E. Hubs can decide either to take risk-averse or risk-seeking strategy against the uncertainties. Uncertainty based integration of S. E. Hubs into distribution network is evaluated regarding the IEEE 33-bus test system and the results obtained from simulations are presented for comparison.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据