Impact of Hydrogen Production and Thermal Energy Recovery of Pemfcpps On Optimal Management of Renewable Micro-Grids

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been
fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI
10.1109/TII.2015.2475715, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics
1
Impact of Hydrogen Production and Thermal

Energy Recovery of PEMFCPPs on Optimal
Management of Renewable Micro-Grids
Taher Niknam, Abdollah Kavousi-Fard, Student Member, IEEE, and Amir Ostadi, Student
Member, IEEE,
Abstract—This paper addresses impacts of hydrogen voltage drop

production and thermal energy recovery with an economic BG : Bid of a DG unit (except PEMFCPP)
model of Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Power BGrid : Bid of utility
Plant on optimal operation management of renewable Bpump : Hydrogen pumping cost
micro-grids. A stochastic scenario-based approach is pro-
Bstack : Price of natural gas
posed to capture uncertainties of electrical and thermal
loads, output power production of photovoltaic and wind
Bth : Fuel price for the residential thermal loads
turbine units, market price, natural gas price, hydrogen CO2 : Oxygen concentration at the cathode membrane/gas
selling price, operating temperature of the stack of fuel interface
cells, and pressure of hydrogen and oxygen. The proposed EN ernst : Thermodynamic potential of the cell (open-
economic model is tested on a micro-grid with different circuit voltage)
types of power sources including fuel cells, photovoltaic Jmax : Maximum current density of the cell
and wind turbine units, and Micro Turbines. Nbat : Number of bats
Ne : Number of equality constraints
Keywords—Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell; Hy-
drogen Production; Thermal Energy; Uncertainty. Ng : Number of DG units except PEMFCPP
Nine : Number of inequality constraints
Nit : Total number of iterations
N OMENCLATURE Nt : Number of time intervals
Indices NU : Number of uncertain variables
i: Index of the parametric coefficient of the cell, an PG,max : Maximum value of active power production of
uncertain variable, an equality constraint, a DG unit a DG unit (except PEMFCPP)
(except PEMFCPP), or a member of population PG,min : Minimum value of active power production of
j : Index of a scenario, an inequality constraint, an a DG unit (except PEMFCPP)
element of a vector, bat number, or modification PGrid,max : Maximum value of active power production
strategy number of the grid
q : Index of a member of population PGrid,min : Minimum value of active power production
of the grid
Psc : Scheduled spinning reserve
Superscripts Pstack,max : Maximum value of active power production
k : Corresponding to iteration number of PEMFCPP
t: Corresponding to time interval number Pstack,min : Minimum value of active power production
of PEMFCPP
Parameters Relec : Equivalent resistance of the collecting plates and
B : Constant required for calculating the mass transport electrodes
Rprot : Equivalent resistance of the membrane
Taher Niknam is with the Department of Electronics and Electrical
Engineering, Shiraz University of Technology (SUTech), Shiraz, Iran rte : Thermal-to-electrical energy ratio
of f
(e-mail: niknam@sutech.ac.ir). Abdollah Kavousi-Fard is with the SG : Shut-down cost
Department of Electrical Engineering, Nourabad Mamasani Branch, on
SG : Start-up cost
Islamic Azad University, Nourabad Mamasani, Iran (email: abdol-
T : Fuel cell operating temperature
lah.kavousifard@gmail.com). Amir Ostadi is with the Department of
Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Waterloo, tof f : Time period at which the fuel cell is off
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (email: aostadi@uwaterloo.ca) Vact : Activation over-potential of the fuel cell
1551-3203 (c) 2015 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See
http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI
2
Vcon : Mass transport voltage drop SET : Set of indexes assigned to the bats which use a
α: Hot start-up cost modification strategy
αu : Constant used for updating the loudness of the u: Status of a DG unit (except PEMFCPP)
generated pulse uGrid : Status of utility
β : Cold start-up cost uH : Status of hydrogen production of PEMFCPP
γ : Constant used for updating the emission rate of the ustack : Status of electrical generation of PEMFCPP
generated pulse uthrm : Status of thermal generation of PEMFCPP
: Constant used for updating the position of an V : Velocity of a member of population
individual VF C : Fuel cell output voltage
ξ : Parametric coefficient of the cell Vohmic : Ohmic voltage drop of the fuel cell
τ : FC cooling time constant Vstack : Stack terminal voltage
ω : Constant used for updating the probability of a W : Weighting factor
modification strategy X : Position of a member of population (vector of control
variables)
Xmu : Vector of mutation among three random members
Variables
of the population
A: Loudness of the generated pulse
xmu : Element of the vector Xmu
cr : Random number between 0 and 1
Xsort : Member of sorted population
f : Objective function
Xtp : Temporarily updated position of X
fopt : Optimal value of the objective function
Xtp,s2 : Temporarily updated position of X using modi-
f r: Frequency of the generated pulse
fication strategy II
f rmax : Maximum value of the frequency of the gener-
Xtp1 ,s1 : First temporarily updated position of X using
ated pulse
modification strategy I
f rmin : Minimum value of the frequency of the generated
xtp1 ,s1 : Element of the vector Xtp1 ,s1
pulse
Xtp2 ,s1 : Second temporarily updated position of X using
Gbest : Best position among the particles
modification strategy I
gbest : Element of the vector Gbest
δ : Accumulator
He : Equality constraint
η : Overall efficiency of PEMFCPP
Hine : Inequality constraint
ηst : Hydrogen storage efficiency
iF C : Fuel cell current
ηstack : Fuel cell efficiency
J : Current density of the fuel cell
ψ : Probability of a modification strategy
Lelec : Total electrical load
ψnor : Normalized probability of a modification strategy
Lthrm : Thermal load demand
MD : Mean value of the population calculated column-
wise I. I NTRODUCTION
Mr−H2 : Mass rate of hydrogen
Ns : Number of scenarios after reduction In recent years, the concept of renewable micro-grids
Pbest : Best position found by an individual (MGs) has become a favorable topic among the re-
PG : Active power output of a DG unit (except PEM- searchers all over the world [1]. Utilization of renewable
FCPP) energy sources (RESs) in new competitive market-driven
PGrid : Active power purchased/sold from/to the utility environments can improve power systems from both
PH : Hydrogen equivalent power economical and environmental points of view [2]. From
PH−max : Stack maximum capacity minus its production the network point of view, the MG is regarded as a
PH−usage : Hydrogen-equivalent power entering the FC controllable unit which can be either a load (extracting
stack via the storage tank power from the network) or a source (supplying power
PHst : Power equivalent to stored hydrogen to the utility) [3]. In a renewable MG, there may be
Pstack : Stack output power several types of RESs such as Photovoltaics (PVs), Wind
Pthrm : Thermal power of PEMFCPP Turbines (WTs), Micro Turbines (MTs), and Fuel Cells
P rO2 : Partial pressures of oxygen (FCs).
P rob: Probability of an uncertain variable in a scenario In [4], Chen et al. proposes a new method based
r: Emission rate of the generated pulse on the matrix real-coded genetic algorithm to study
rie : Random number between 0 and 1 the operation of an MG. Reference [5] proposes a
3
new method based on linear programming technique

to reduce the total cost of a hybrid solar-wind MG
with respect to the environmental factors. In [6], fuel
consumption of a MG is minimized when fulfilling
the electrical/thermal loads with guaranteing a certain
minimum reserve power. Interactive impacts of an MG
on the utility are investigated by Tsikalakis et al. [7]. In
[8], an economic environmental analysis of two micro
CHP (combined heat and power) alternatives, i.e., gas
engines and FC with dissimilar operating conditions are
assessed for residential buildings. References [9], [10]
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a PEMFCPP
devise a techno-economic model for the optimal design
and management of FCs micro CHP systems. In [11],
a comparison between the heat-led and electricity-led A. Electrical Power of the Fuel Cell Stack
operation strategies of a residential electric system in-
corporating CHP is implemented. In [12], El-Sharkh et Figure 1 shows a schematic diagram of the PEMFCPP.
al. propose an economic model for a Proton Exchange The FC stack is composed of series connection of proton
Membrane Fuel Cell Power Plant (PEMFCPP) with exchange membrane fuel cells. In each cell, reduction
the thermal energy recovery and hydrogen production and oxidization of H2 and O2 , respectively, lead to the
capabilities of the PEMFCPP considered. Reference [13] flow of electrons in the external circuit and generate the
shows that utilization of both heat and electrical power cell current once the electric path is closed. Hydrogen re-
can increase the efficiency of PEMFCPP to about 70 % quired for reduction reaction is supplied by the reformer
compared to that of 35-50 % when just considering the to the FCs. The cell output voltage (VF C ) is defined as
electricity generation. However, the main drawback with [15]:
the previous works is that they neglect the uncertainties
associated with parameters of the problem.
This paper studies the interactions between the PEM- VF C = EN ernst − Vact − Vohmic − Vcon (1)
FCPP and the utility in a stochastic environment when • Vact is the activation over-potential which can be
thermal energy recovery and hydrogen production are formulated as:
taken into account. The proposed economic model im-
proves the efficiency of PEMFCPP and reduces the Vact = − ξ1 + ξ2 T +
total fuel cost. In order to have a more realistic study,
uncertainties of PV/WT power production, the electri- ξ3 T ln CO2 + ξ4 T ln iF C (2)
cal/thermal loads, the market bid, the natural gas price,
the hydrogen selling price, the operating temperature
of the PEMFCPP, and the pressure of the hydrogen P rO2
CO 2 = −498 (3)
(H2 ) and Oxygen (O2 ) are considered in the evaluations. 5.08 × 106 × exp
In order to solve this problem, a new self-adaptive T
optimization technique based on Bat Algorithm (BA) • Vohmic is the ohmic voltage drop and is defined by:
is introduced. The proposed optimization method uses
Vohmic = Relec + Rprot iF C (4)
self-adaptive modification strategies to guarantee that a
premature convergence does not occur. The feasibility • Vcon is caused by the mass transportation of the
and performance of the proposed stochastic method are reacting gases and is defined by:
studied on an MG test system which includes WTs, J
PEMFCPPs, PVs, and MTs. Vcon = −B × ln 1 − (5)
Jmax
II. M ODEL OF THE PEMFCPP The voltage seen at the stack terminals (Vstack ) is equal
to VF C multiplied by the number of cells in series.
Among different types of fuel cells, PEMFCPP is the The electrical power produced by the stack (Pstack ) is
most popular. This is mainly due to the properties such evaluated as [16]:
as low operating temperature (80-100), fast start-up, and
significantly low levels of noise and emission. Pstack = Vstack × iF C (6)
4
B. Hydrogen Production t
where ηstack is a function of P LRt as [17]:
As seen in Fig. 1, the reformer divides the produced if P LRt ≤ 0.05

hydrogen into two portions; the one that enters the stack t
ηstack = 0.2716
directly, and the one that is stored in the hydrogen
tank for future use. The main idea behind hydrogen else
production is to take advantage of the extra electrical 5 4
t
capacity of FC when the load demand is less than FC ηstack = 0.9033 P LRt − 2.9996 P LRt +
maximum production capacity. Lets define Mr−H2 (in 3 2
kg/s) as the mass rate of H2 used to generate the 3.6503 P LRt − 2.0704 P LRt +
equivalent power of PH at the output of every cell.
Mr−H2 is related to PH by the following formula [12]: 0.4623P LRt + 0.3747 (12)
P
H
Mr−H2 = 1.05 × 10−8 (7) III. S TOCHASTIC F RAMEWORK
Vstack
The hydrogen equivalent power available in the hydrogen In this paper, a scenario generation approach is used
t ) can be formulated as:
tank at time interval t (PHst to take care of uncertainties of the problem.
t t−1
PHst = PHst + ηst × PHt − PH−usage
t
(8)
A. Scenario Generation
According to statistical reports, WT characteristics
C. Thermal Energy Recovery
can be best modeled by Weibull distribution function
During operation of a PEMFCPP, heat is generated [18]. The other uncertain parameters are modeled by the
by the reformer. The efficiency of PEMFCPP is load- Normal distribution function. Domain of the associated
dependant. Especially, at full loads, it reduces signifi- Probability Density Function (PDF) functions is divided
cantly in such a way that the thermal power becomes into several slices or probability levels. Each slice rep-
comparable with the electrical output power. By recov- resents a specific deviation of an uncertain parameter
ering this thermal energy, a Combined Heat and Power from its corresponding mean value. Roulette Wheel
(CHP) system is achieved which can supply some part Mechanism (RWM) is used to generate the scenarios.
of the MG’s thermal loads. Defining the thermal power This process begins with generation of a random number
t
available at interval t as Pthrm , one has [17]: between 0 and 1. This random number will fall in one
of the RWM slices. Using this method, a set of initial
t t
Pthrm = rte × PHt + Pstack
t
(9) scenarios is generated for all uncertain parameters.
t it is formulated as [17]:
In this paper,= rte B. Scenario Reduction and Aggregation
if P LRt ≤ 0.05
In the initial phase, a large number of scenarios are
t
generated. However, due to computational restrictions,
rte = 0.6801 the number of scenarios should be reduced later on
using a scenario reduction technique. This technique
else is implemented by two mechanisms; (i) deleting the
4 3 similar scenarios and (ii) choosing the most probable
t
rte = 1.0758 P LRt − 1.9739 P LRt + scenarios. Once the reduction process is over, each of
the remained scenarios (Ns scenarios) constructs a de-
2 terministic framework for the problem [19]. The problem
1.5005 P LRt − 0.2817P LRt + 0.6838 (10) is solved for every individual scenario and the results are
The overall efficiency of PEMFC at interval t can be combined together to evaluate the optimal value of the
given as: objective function (fopt ) as:
N
QU
t
Pstack + ηst × PHt + min Pthrm
t , Ltthrm Ns P robi,j
ηt = i=1
X
t (11) fopt = fj (13)
Pstack + PHt Ps N
N QU
j=1 P robi,j
t
ηstack j=1 i=1
5
IV. F ORMULATION OF THE O PTIMIZATION P ROBLEM C. Inequality Constraints

In this section, the problem of operation manage- The inequality constrains are defined as:
ment of an MG considering different types of RESs
1) Generation Limits: At time interval t, the mini-
is formulated. Equation (14) shows formulation of the
mum and maximum thresholds for different generating
optimization problem in its general form.
units are:
M inimize f (X)
0 ≤ PHt ≤ PH−max
t
Subject to
PGt i ,min ≤ PGt i ≤ PGt i ,max
He,i (X) = 0 i = 1, 2, . . . , Ne
t t t
PGrid,min ≤ PGrid ≤ PGrid,max
Hine,j (X) ≤ 0 j = 1, 2, . . . , Nine (14)
t t t
Pstack,min ≤ Pstack ≤ Pstack,max (21)
A. Objective Function
2) Spinning reserve: The constraint on spinning re-
The objective function is defined as the total cost serve at time interval t is formulated as:
of MG which consists of the fuel cost for RESs, the
Ltelec + Psc
t
≤
start-up/shut-down cost, and the cost of power exchange
Ng
between the MG and the market. The objective function X
is formulated as [12], [20]: uti PGt i ,max +
i=1
Nt
" !
X
f (X) = hti + utGrid BGrid
t t
PGrid + utGrid PGrid,max
t
+ utstack Pstack,max
t
(22)
t=1
t utstack Pstack
t + utH PHt
Bstack t + utH Bpump
t t
ηst PHt +
ηstack V. S ELF -A DAPTIVE M ODIFIED BAT A LGORITHM
#

t
Bth × max Ltthrm − utthrm Pthrmt
,0 + α − Bat Algorithm (BA) is a metaheuristic population-
based optimization technique inspired by behavior of
t
utH BHs PH,end + β 1 − exp
of f
+ OM (15) bats using an echolocation process. In case of BA, each
τ member of population represents the m-dimensional
where position of the corresponding bat in the swarm. At each
Ng h
X iteration, every bat is flying at a random velocity and
hti = uti PGt i BG
t
i
+ generates a pulse with a specific frequency, emission
i=1
i rate, and loudness. As the individuals search for better
on
SG + S of f
|ut
− ut−1
| (16) positions, they change the characteristics of their pulses
i Gi i i
[21]. At iteration k (k ≥ 1), the position of each bat is
The control vector X is as follows: updated as follows:
h i
X = PGt i , PGrid
t t
, Pstack , PHt , Pthrm
t
, Ut (17)
1×m Vik+1 = Vik + f rik Gkbest − Xik
Xik+1 = Xik + Vik+1
h i
U t = uti , utGrid , utstack , utH , utthrm (18)
1×(Ng +4)

rik+1 = rie 1 − exp(−γk)
m = 2 × Nt × Ng + 4 (19)

f rik = f rmin + ckr1 ,i f rmax − f rmin
B. Equality Constraint Ak+1

i = αu Aki (23)
The equality constraint at time interval t is formulated This procedure simulates a global search for finding the
as balance between production and consumption as: optimal position. For a local search, a random number
Ng
(ckr2 ,i ) between 0 and 1 is generated. If this number is
X bigger than the pulse emission rate rik , then, the position
Ltelec = uti PGt i + utGrid PGrid
t
+ utstack Pstack
t
+
i=1
of current individual is temporarily updated as:

k
t t
Xi,tp = Xik + Aki Pi,best
k
− Xik (24)
ηst uH PHt − max Ltthrm − utthrm Pthrm
t
,0 (20)
6
If ckr2 ,i ≤ rik , then, the temporary update for the corre- all of the three modification techniques. An accumulator
sponding bat is handled by: (δ ) is defined for each modification method with its
k
initial value to be zero. After each iteration, the members
Xi,tp = Xik + Aki Xhk − Xik (25) of population are sorted according to their correspond-
ing values of objective function in a descending order.
If this procedure leads to a better position for ith
k Defining Xsort,1 and Xsort,Nbat as the best and the
individual, then, Xi,tp replaces Xik . In the rest, a new
worst solutions in the sorted population, respectively, a
Self-Adaptive Modified Bat Algorithm (SAMBA) is pro-
weighting factor, Wj (j = 1, 2, . . . , Nbat ), is assigned to
posed. A specific probability is assigned to each modi-
each bat as:
fication technique to let each bat choose the technique
which best fits its current situation. log Nbat − j + 1
Wj = N
(31)
Pbat
log(i)
A. Modification Strategy I i=1
This strategy (extracted from the concept of using Let’s define SETzk ⊆{1, 2, . . . , Nbat } (z = 1, 2, 3)
the crossover and mutation operators in GA) is used as the set of indexes assigned to the bats which use
to increase the diversity of searching process. Three z th modification strategy at the iteration k . Then, the
individuals q1 , q2 , and q3 are chosen randomly from the accumulator assigned to each modification method is
population in such a way that q1 6= q2 6= q3 6= i. A updated at the end of the iteration by:
mutated solution is generated as: N
Pbat
h i Wj
k
Xmu = xkmu,j = Xq1 + ckr3 ,i Xq2 − Xq3 (26) j=1,j∈SETzk
1×m δzk+1 = δzk + (32)
Nmod,z
Using the mutated solution, two temporary positions
k k The probability of each modification technique is up-
(Xi,tp 1 ,s1
and Xi,tp 2 ,s1
) are calculated for ith bat as:
h i dated by:
k k
Xi,tp 1 ,s1
= x i,tp1 ,s1 ,j (27) δzk+1
1×m ψzk+1 = (1 − ω)ψzk + ω (33)
Nit
xkmu,j if ckr3 ,i ≤ ckr4 ,i

where xki,tp1 ,s1 ,j = Finally, the assigned probabilities are normalized by:
k
gbest,j else
k ψzk
ψz,nor = 3
(34)
k
ckr5 ,i Xik ckr6 ,i Gkbest Xik ψjk
P
Xi,tp 2 ,s1
= + − (28)
j=1
In each iteration, every bat chooses a specific modifica-

B. Modification Strategy II tion strategy based on its normalized probability (ψnor )
using a Roulette Wheel Mechanism.
In this strategy, members of the population are encour-
aged to move towards Gkbest as:
VI. S IMULATION R ESULTS
k k k k k k
Xi,tp,s2 = Xi + cr7 ,i Gbest − 1 + cr8 ,i MD (29)
In this paper, an MG with four different types of
RESs, i.e., PV, WT, MT, and PEMFCPP is used as the
C. Modification Strategy III test system. Figure 2 shows the single-line diagram of
this system [20]. The analysis is implemented in a 24-
In this strategy, a heuristic function is used to change hour period. Required data for solving the optimization
the value of in (24) and (25) as: problem are shown in Table I [12], [16], [20]. It should
be noted that if the recovered thermal energy of the
1

PEMFCPP cannot supply the thermal loads completely,

1 Nit k
k+1 = (30) the extra required thermal energy will be supplied by
2 × Nit
an auxiliary boiler [22]. To see how uncertainty affects
Let us define the probability of each modification optimal operation management of the MG, two different
strategy as ψz (z = 1, 2, 3). When starting the opti- analyses are presented in the simulation results; (i) deter-
mization algorithm, this probability is set to 0.33 for ministic analysis and (ii) stochastic analysis. In addition,
7
three statuses of operation (SOP ) are considered in TABLE I

terms of hydrogen production. In SOP1 , MG is operated R EQUIRED DATA FOR SOLVING THE OPTIMIZATION PROBLEM
under the condition that FC does not have the capabilities
of thermal energy recovery and hydrogen production. Parameter Value
SOP2 represents the status in which FC benefits from T [16] 333 k
PH2 [16] 1 (atm)
thermal energy recovery but does not have hydrogen PO2 [16] 0.2095 (atm)
production. In SOP3 , both thermal energy recovery and B [16] 0.016
hydrogen production are considered for FC. ξ1 [16] -0.948
ξ2 [16] 0.00312
ξ3 [16] 0.000076
ξ4 [16] -0.000193
A. Deterministic Analysis Jmax [16] 469 mA/cm2
Min & Max power of FCPP [20] 0 & 170 (kW)
In this section, first, superiority of the proposed algo- Min & Max power of MT [20] 6 & 80 (kW)
rithm is confirmed by comparing its optimization results Min & Max power of PV [20] 0 & 45 (kW)
with those of some other well-known algorithms, i.e., Min & Max power of WT [20] 0 & 35 (kW)
Min & Max power of the utility -95 & 95 (kW)
Genetic Algorithm (GA), Particle Swarm Optimization Price of natural gas for FCPP [12] 0.21 ect/kWh
(PSO), Fuzzy Self-Adaptive PSO (FSAPSO), and BA Fuel price for residential loads [12] 0.29 ect/kWh
[20]. Table II shows the optimization results for 40 trials. Equivalent price of selling hydrogen [12] 9.44 ect/kWh
As seen in this table, the optimal solution achieved by Hydrogen storage efficiency (ηst ) [12] 0.95
Hydrogen equivalent pumping price [12] 0.09 ect/kWh
SAMBA, is significantly better than that obtained by the FC cooling time constant [12] 0.75
other methods. In addition, the proposed algorithm con- Hot start-up cost [12] 0.26 ect
verges quicker with the small value of standard deviation Cold start-up cost [12] 0.7 ect
Bid of MT [20] 0.457 ect/kWh
confirming high stability of SAMBA in comparison with Bid of PV [20] 2.584 ect/kWh
the others. It should bo noted that the results presented Bid of WT [20] 1.073 ect/kWh
in Table II are based on having a sensitivity analysis for Nbat 30
each of the algorithms to determine the best parameters f rmin 0
f rmax 100
for the corresponding optimization techniques. Another Nit 300
point worth mentioning about this table is that the CPU ω 0.142
time is calculated as the time required for the algorithm
to reach the iteration in which the optimal solution is
TABLE II
achieved. For the proposed SAMBA, the number of C OMPARISON OF OPTIMIZATION RESULTS AMONG FIVE
corresponding iteration is 14. It should be noted that the DIFFERENT ALGORITHMS IN THE DETERMINISTIC FRAMEWORK
CPU time is not a significant matter for one day-ahead
scheduling of a renewable MG. Table III compares Best Worst Average Standard CPU
Method Solution Solution Solution Deviation Time
(ect) (ect) (ect) (ect) (sec)
GA 689.937 715.892 704.660 8.519 16.001
PSO 683.746 711.543 699.497 9.113 15.291
FSAPSO 589.837 601.983 595.480 4.272 16.392
BA 681.309 703.083 693.302 7.052 15.382
SAMBA 539.22 541.682 540.428 0.780 12.738
TABLE III
C OMPARISON OF THE OPTIMIZATION RESULTS AMONG SOP1 ,
SOP2 , AND SOP3 USING SAMBA
Best Worst Average Standard CPU

Method Solution Solution Solution Deviation Time
(ect) (ect) (ect) (ect) (sec)
SOP1 684.23 684.05 685.94 0.837 12.032
SOP2 637.88 639.39 638.52 0.76 12.52
SOP3 539.22 541.68 540.43 0.78 12.74
Fig. 2. Single line diagram of the test system
8
the optimization results using SOP1 , SOP2 , and SOP3 ,

respectively. The results of this table show that using
the thermal energy recovery and hydrogen production
capabilities, the total cost reduces by 145.01 ect and
98.66 ect in a day with respect to conditions represented
by SOP1 and SOP2 , respectively. The cost reduction is
more profound once calculated over a month or a season.
Comparison among the efficiencies of PEMFCPP in
Fig. 5. Thermal load and recovered thermal generation based on
the 24-hour period for SOP1 , SOP2 , and SOP3 are SOP3
shown in Fig. 3. As seen in this figure, when FC
has the capabilities of thermal energy recovery and
hydrogen production, its efficiency is higher compared indicates a filtering ratio of 100). The optimization
to the cases where either or none of these capabilities results are shown in Table IV. As seen in this table,
are not considered. Figures 4 and 5 show the thermal considering the uncertainty has raised the total cost of
load and the recovered thermal generation over the 24- the MG. This indicates that even though, taking the
hour study period based on SOP2 and SOP3 , respec- uncertainty of the variables into consideration increases
tively. As seen in Fig. 4, there exists hours at which the complexity of the problem, it helps the operator find
the recovered thermal energy exceeds the amount of a more realistic solution.
thermal load (hours 9, 10, 13-17). This indicates some
TABLE IV
unused thermal generation capacity of the PEMFCPP C OMPARISON OF OPTIMIZATION RESULTS AMONG FIVE
at the corresponding time intervals. This condition has DIFFERENT ALGORITHMS IN THE STOCHASTIC FRAMEWORK
improved using SOP3 in Fig. 5 which shows that the
additional thermal generation capacity of the PEMFCPP Best Worst Average Standard
is utilized to produce hydrogen. Method Solution Solution Solution Deviation
(ect) (ect) (ect) (ect)
GA 745.973 789.749 765.603 14.631
PSO 736.874 782.492 761.844 14.981
B. Stochastic Analysis FSAPSO 720.908 754.836 741.368 11.158
BA 730.731 779.684 760.174 13.347
In this work, the initial number of scenarios is 2000 SAMBA 574.008 584.636 578.643 3.870
which is reduced to 20 after scenario reduction. (This
VII. C ONCLUSIONS
This paper investigated the effects of hydrogen pro-
duction and thermal energy recovery of a Proton Ex-
change Membrane Fuel Cell Power Plant on optimal
energy management of a micro-grid with different types
of renewable energy sources such as Wind Turbines,
Photovoltaics, and Micro Turbines. The energy manage-
ment problem is of mixed-integer nonlinear program-
Fig. 3. Efficiencies of PEMFCPP in the 24-hour period for SOP1 , ming type. To find the optimal solution of this problem, a
SOP2 , and SOP3
metaheuristic method based on Bat Algorithm (BA) was
used. This method benefits a stochastic framework based
on scenario generation to capture uncertainties associated
with different parameters. Using different modification
techniques, performance of the optimization algorithm
improves significantly compared to some other well-
known metaheuristic methods.
R EFERENCES
Fig. 4. Thermal load and recovered thermal generation based on [1] J.M. Carrasco, “Power-Electronic Systems for the Grid In-
SOP2 tegration of Renewable Energy Sources: A Survey,” IEEE
9
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, Vol. 53, No. 4, pp. 1002 MS, “Impact of recovered thermal energy management on the
- 1016, June 2006. economics of operation of a grid-parallel PEM fuel cell power
[2] A. Kahrobaeian and Y.A.-R.I. Mohamed, “Interactive Distributed plant,” Journal of Electric Power Systems Research, Vol. 77, No.
Generation Interface for Flexible Micro-Grid Operation in Smart 8, pp. 1056-1064, June 2007.
Distribution Systems,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable En- [18] C.D. Lai, Xie Min, and D.N.P. Murthy, “A modified Weibull
ergy, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 295-305, April 2012. distribution,” IEEE Transactions on Reliability, Vol. 52, No. 1,
[3] F. Katiraei, R. Iravani, N. Hatziargyriou, and A. Dimeas, “Mi- pp. 33-37, March 2003.
crogrids management,” IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, Vol. [19] P. Maghouli, S.H. Hosseini, M.O. Buygi, and M. Shahideh-
6, No. 3, pp. 54-65, May-June 2008. pour, “A Scenario-Based Multi-Objective Model for Multi-Stage
[4] C. Chen, S. Duan, T. Cai, B. Liu, and G. Hu, “Smart energy Transmission Expansion Planning,” IEEE Transactions on Power
management system for optimal microgrid economic operation,” Systems, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 470-478, February 2011.
IET Renewable Power Generation, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 258-267, [20] A. Anvari Moghaddam, A. Seifi, T. Niknam, and M. R. Al-
April 2012. izadeh Pahlavani, “Multi-objective operation management of
[5] R. Chedid and S. Raiman, “Unit sizing and control of hybrid a renewable MG (micro-grid) with back-up micro-turbine/fuel
wind solar power systems,” IEEE Transactions on Energy cell/battery hybrid power source,” Journal of Energy, Vol. 36,
Conversion, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 79-85, March 1997. No. 11, pp. 6490-6507, November 2011.
[6] C. Hernandez-Aramburo, T.C. Green, and N. Mugniot, “Fuel [21] X. S. Yang, “Bat algorithm for multi-objective optimization,”
Consumption Minimization of a Microgrid,” IEEE Transactions International Journal of Bio-Inspired computation, Vol. 3, No.
on Industrial Applications, Vol. 41, No. 3, pp. 671-681, May 5, pp. 267-274, September 2011.
2005. [22] P. Mago and A. Hueffed, “Evaluation of a turbine driven
[7] A.G. Tsikalakis and N.D. Hatziargyriou, “Centralized control for CCHP system for large office buildings under different operating
optimizing microgrids operation,” IEEE Transactions on Energy strategies,” Journal of Energy and Buildings, Vol. 42, No. 10,
Conversion, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 241-248, March 2008. pp. 1628-1635, October 2010.
[8] H. Ren and W. Gao, “Economic and environmental evaluation of
micro CHP systems with different operating modes for residential
buildings in Japan,” Energy and Buildings, Vol. 42, No. 6, pp.
853-861, June 2010.
[9] A.D. Hawkes, D.J.L. Brett, and N.P. Brandon, “Fuel cell micro- Taher Niknam received his B.Sc. degree from
CHP techno-economics: part 1-model concept and formulation,” Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran, and his M.Sc.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Vol. 34, No. 23, pp. and Ph.D. degrees from Sharif University of
9545-9557, June 2010. Technology, Tehran, Iran. He is a faculty mem-
[10] A.D. Hawkes, D.J.L. Brett, and N.P. Brandon, “Fuel cell micro- ber in the Electrical Engineering Department at
CHP techno-economics: part 2-Model application to consider Shiraz University of Technology. His research
the economic and environmental impact of stack degradation,” interests include Power System Restructuring,
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Vol. 34, No. 23, pp. Impacts of Distributed Generations on Power
9558-9569, June 2010. Systems, Optimization Methods, and Evolu-
[11] A.D. Hawkes and M.A. Leach, “Cost-effective operating tionary Algorithms.
strategy for residential microcombined heat and power,” Energy,
Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 711-723, May 2007.
[12] M.Y. El-Sharkh, M. Tanrioven, A. Rahman, and M.S. Alam, Abdollah Kavousifard received his B.Sc. and
“Economics of hydrogen production and utilization strategies for M.Sc. degree from Shiraz University of Tech-
the optimal operation of a grid-parallel PEM fuel cell power nology and Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran,
plant,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Vol. 35, No. respectively. He is currently pursuing his PhD
16, pp. 8804-8814, August 2010. degree at Shiraz University of Technology.
[13] B. Shabani and J. Andrews, “An experimental investigation of a His research interests are Distribution Systems
PEM fuel cell to supply both heat and power in a solar-hydrogen Analysis, Electric Vehicles (PEVs/PHEVs),
RAPS system,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Vol. Renewable Energy Sources (Wind/FC/PV),
36, No. 9, pp. 5442-5452, May 2011. Stochastic Analysis, Reliability of Power Sys-
[14] T. Niknam, A. Kavousi Fard, and A. Baziar, “Multi-objective tems, Energy Market and Load Forecasting..
stochastic distribution feeder reconfiguration problem consider-
ing hydrogen and thermal energy production by fuel cell power
plants,” Journal of Energy, Vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 563-573, June Amir Ostadi (S’05) received B.Sc. degree in
2012. Electrical Engineering from Sharif University
[15] G. Masters (2004), Renewable and efficient electric power of Technology, Tehran, Iran, and M.Sc. degree
systems, Third Edition, New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons Inc. from the University of Western Ontario, Lon-
[16] J. Correa, F. Farret, L. Canha, and M. Simes, “An don, Ontario, Canada and PhD degree from
Electrochemical-Based Fuel-Cell Model Suitable for Electrical the University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario,
Engineering Automation Approach,” IEEE Transactions on Canada, both in Electrical and Computer En-
Industrial Electronics, Vol. 51, No. 5, pp. 1103-1112, October gineering. His research interests include Power
2004. Electronics, Energy Storage Systems, Opti-
[17] M.Y. El-Sharkh, M. Tanrioven, A. Rahman, and M.S. Alam mization techniques, and Wind-based Power Generation.

Impact of Hydrogen Production and Thermal Energy Recovery of Pemfcpps On Optimal Management of Renewable Micro-Grids

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Impact of Hydrogen Production and Thermal Energy Recovery of Pemfcpps On Optimal Management of Renewable Micro-Grids

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been

Impact of Hydrogen Production and Thermal

Abstract—This paper addresses impacts of hydrogen voltage drop

new method based on linear programming technique

As seen in Fig. 1, the reformer divides the produced if P LRt ≤ 0.05

IV. F ORMULATION OF THE O PTIMIZATION P ROBLEM C. Inequality Constraints

B. Equality Constraint Ak+1

In each iteration, every bat chooses a specific modifica-

three statuses of operation (SOP ) are considered in TABLE I

Best Worst Average Standard CPU

Fig. 2. Single line diagram of the test system

the optimization results using SOP1 , SOP2 , and SOP3 ,

You might also like