4.5 Article

A Robust Optimization for Designing a Charging Station Based on Solar and Wind Energy for Electric Vehicles of a Smart Home in Small Villages

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en11071728

关键词

electric vehicles; optimization; renewable energy charging station

资金

  1. Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP)
  2. Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE) of the Republic of Korea [20174030201670]
  3. Ministry of Education [NRF-2016R1A6A1A03013567]
  4. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [20174030201670] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent years, integration of electric vehicles (EVs) has increased dramatically due to their lower carbon emissions and reduced fossil fuel dependency. However, charging EVs could have significant impacts on the electrical grid. One promising method for mitigating these impacts is the use of renewable energy systems. Renewable energy systems can also be useful for charging EVs where there is no local grid. This paper proposes a new strategy for designing a renewable energy charging station consisting of wind turbines, a photovoltaic system, and an energy storage system to avoid the use of diesel generators in remote communities. The objective function is considered to be the minimization of the total net present cost, including energy production, components setup, and financial viability. The proposed approach, using stochastic modeling, can also guarantee profitable operation of EVs and reasonable effects on renewable energy sizing, narrowing the gap between real-life daily operation patterns and the design stage. The proposed strategy should enhance the efficiency of conventional EV charging stations. The key point of this study is the efficient use of excess electricity. The infrastructure of the charging station is optimized and modeled.

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

4.5
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