4.7 Article

Stochastic multi-objective model for optimal energy exchange optimization of networked microgrids with presence of renewable generation under risk-based strategies

期刊

ISA TRANSACTIONS
卷 73, 期 -, 页码 100-111

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.isatra.2017.12.004

关键词

Risk modelling; Energy exchange optimization; Microgrids; Stochastic programming; Reliability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The inherent volatility and unpredictable nature of renewable generations and load demand pose considerable challenges for energy exchange optimization of microgrids (MG). To address these challenges, this paper proposes a new risk-based multi-objective energy exchange optimization for networked MGs from economic and reliability standpoints under load consumption and renewable power generation uncertainties. In so doing, three various risk-based strategies are distinguished by using conditional value at risk (CVaR) approach. The proposed model is specified as a two-distinct objective function. The first function minimizes the operation and maintenance costs, cost of power transaction between upstream network and MGs as well as power loss cost, whereas the second function minimizes the energy not supplied (ENS) value. Furthermore, the stochastic scenario-based approach is incorporated into the approach in order to handle the uncertainty. Also, Kantorovich distance scenario reduction method has been implemented to reduce the computational burden. Finally, non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGAII) is applied to minimize the objective functions simultaneously and the best solution is extracted by fuzzy satisfying method with respect to risk-based strategies. To indicate the performance of the proposed model, it is performed on the modified IEEE 33-bus distribution system and the obtained results show that the presented approach can be considered as an efficient tool for optimal energy exchange optimization of MGs. (C) 2017 ISA. Published by 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