4.7 Article

Robust design optimization and stochastic performance analysis of a grid-connected photovoltaic system with battery storage and hydrogen storage

期刊

ENERGY
卷 213, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.118798

关键词

Grid-connected demand; Hydrogen storage; Levelized cost of electricity; Photovoltaic; Robust design optimization; Uncertainty quantification

资金

  1. Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique - FNRS [35484777 FRIA-B2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Balancing of intermittent energy such as solar energy can be achieved by batteries and hydrogen-based storage. However, combining these systems received limited attention in a grid-connected framework and its design optimization is often performed assuming fixed parameters. Hence, such optimization induces designs highly sensitive to real-world uncertainties, resulting in a drastic mismatch between simulated and actual performances. To fill the research gap on design optimization of grid-connected, hydrogen-based renewable energy systems, we performed a computationally efficient robust design optimization under different scenarios and compared the stochastic performance based on the corresponding cumulative density functions. This paper provides the optimized stochastic designs and the advantage of each design based on the financial flexibility of the system owner. The results illustrate that the economically preferred solution is a photovoltaic array when the self-sufficiency ratio is irrelevant (< 30%). When a higher self-sufficiency ratio threshold is of interest, i.e. up to 59%, photovoltaic-battery designs and photovoltaic-battery-hydrogen designs provide the cost-competitive alternatives which are least-sensitive to real-world uncertainty. Conclusively, including storage systems improves the probability of attaining an affordable levelized cost of electricity over the system lifetime. Future work will focus on the integration of the heat demand. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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