See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/261127697

Coordinated electric vehicle charging strategy for optimal operation of

distribution network

Conference Paper · October 2012

DOI: 10.1109/ISGTEurope.2012.6465844

CITATIONS READS
37 174

6 authors, including:

Karen Zhan Zechun Hu

Ghent University Tsinghua University
12 PUBLICATIONS   736 CITATIONS    218 PUBLICATIONS   8,231 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Zhiwei Xu Long Jia

The Boston Consulting Group Tsinghua University
29 PUBLICATIONS   2,117 CITATIONS    13 PUBLICATIONS   660 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Electric Vehicle View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Zhiwei Xu on 06 March 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

2012 3rd IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe (ISGT Europe), Berlin
1

Coordinated Electric Vehicle Charging Strategy

for Optimal Operation of Distribution Network
Kaiqiao Zhan, Zechun Hu, Member, IEEE, Yonghua Song, Fellow, IEEE, Zhuowei Luo, Student
Member, IEEE, Zhiwei Xu, Student Member, IEEE and Long Jia

economic and secure operation of power systems by

Abstract--Because of global warming and shortage of fossil
fuels, much attention has been paid to plug-in electric vehicles
(PEVs) worldwide in recent years. With possibly millions of
PEVs on road in the future, it is essential for power network
operators, especially distribution network operators, to
implement coordinated PEV charging. In this paper, an optimal
charging method is proposed for PEVs to maximize profits of
distribution companies. By introducing voltage constraints, the
optimization method guarantees both security and economics of
distribution network operation. To reduce computational
difficulties, an iterative approach is presented and linear
programming models are built and solved in each iteration with
updated nodal voltages. The computing speed of the method can
meet the need of real-time operation. Using the 12.66kV, 33-bus
distribution network as the test system, simulation results show
merits of the coordinated charging method and effectiveness of
the proposed voltage constraints.
Index Terms--Plug-in electric vehicle (PEV), Coordinated
charging, Distribution network, Voltage constraints, Optimal
operation.
I. INTRODUCTION
B ECAUSE of advantages in reducing greenhouse gas
emissions and dependence on petroleum [1], the
development of PEVs has captured world’s attention. It can be
predicted that charging of large-scale PEVs will pose
significant impacts on distribution network operation.
Uncoordinated charging may cause problems like branch
overloading [2], voltage drop [3], harmonic problems [4] and
so forth. In [5], the impact caused by the charging load on a
typical low voltage distribution grid in UK is studied under
different penetration and aggregation level scenarios. In [4],
harmonic problems caused by the charging load are studied
and some suggestions are made to PEV owners. In [6], the
relationship between losses and PEV penetration in micro
grids is studied by using the Monte Carlo simulation method.
In [7], the impact of the charging load on transformer lives is
discussed in details.
Though the charging load of PEVs may cause problems to
the network, on the other hand, it can also bring benefits to
This work is supported by the National High Technology Research and
Development Program of China (2011AA05A110).
Kaiqiao Zhan, Zechun Hu, Yonghua Song, Zhuowei Luo, Zhiwei Xu and
Long Jia are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Tsinghua
University, Beijing, P.R.C. (e-mail: zkq609@gmail.com,
zechhu@tsinghua.edu.cn, yhsong@tsinghua.edu.cn,
luozhuowei10@gmail.com, rickyzhiwei@gmail.com,
jialong07@foxmail.com.)
optimizing the charging processes. Thus, coordinated charging
strategies for PEVs have become a research focus recently. In
[8], a method is proposed to reduce power losses by
scheduling the charging process of each PEV in the
distribution network. Reference [9] proves that coordinated
charging can improve the power quality, mitigate voltage
imbalance and reduce power losses. In [10], the relationships
between losses, the load factor and variation of load power are
analyzed, and then a coordinated charging strategy is proposed
to reduce the losses and smooth variation of the aggregated
load. In [11], PEVs are optimally scheduled to charge at
corresponding nodes which will bring minimum impact on
system losses by analyzing the sensitivities.
In published work on PEV coordinated charging [8-11], the
losses are often chosen as the optimization targets to guarantee
economics of distribution network operation. However, it may
not help the distribution network achieve maximum profits if
the electricity purchase/retail price varies over time. In this
paper, an optimization method is proposed to maximize profits
of the distribution company instead of losses. Voltage
constraints are considered in the model to guarantee secure
operation. By updating nodal voltages iteratively, a linear
programming model is solved in each iteration instead of
solving a complex nonlinear non-convex programming model,
making the computing speed meet the needs of on-line
applications. The coordinated charging method is simulated on
the 33-bus distribution system and several conclusions are
drawn.
This paper is organized as follows. Section II describes the
proposed formulation to maximize profits of distribution
companies. The detailed derivation of voltage constraints and
the iterative process are represented and analyzed. Section III
shows the results tested on the 33-bus distribution system. In
Section IV, some conclusions are drawn based on the
simulation results.
II. MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION FOR COORDINATED
CHARGING
A. Assumptions and Feature Descriptions
To build a simple model, several reasonable assumptions
and features of the model are listed as follows:
(1) The residential distribution grid has a radial or tree
topology.
(2) The root node of the distribution system is regarded as a
slack node with known voltage magnitude. Without loss of

978-1-4673-2597-4/12/$31.00 ©2012 IEEE

 2

generality, the voltage angle of the slack node can be set equal
to zero.
(3) It is assumed that the distribution company is not only the
distribution network operator but also the electricity retailer.
As an intermediary, the distribution company purchases
electricity from generation companies or other suppliers at
purchase prices and sells it to customers at retail prices.
(4) Customers charge their PEVs in private garages, i.e. PEVs
have fixed charge locations. Thus the network operator can
only control the charging time and charging power of PEVs.
(5) Customers require that their PEVs should be fully charged
within the charging periods they set.
(6) The charging power is continuously adjustable.
Pn ,t + jQn ,t is the charging power at node n at time interval t .
Pn0,t + jQn0,t is the normal resident load power at node n at
time interval t . It is predicted based on the historical load data
each day.
μ is the efficiency of the charger.
K n is the number of PEVs charging at node n .
Cmax is the maximum capacity of a PEV.
Pmax is the maximum allowable charging power.
λ is the power factor of charging power.
U na,t + jU nb,t is the voltage of node n at time interval t .

B. Optimization Model I na,t + jI nb,t is the injected current of node n at time interval t .
The electricity consumption in the distribution system can Constraints (2) describe the customers’ charging demand.
be divided into three parts, which are the normal resident load, Constraints (3) suggest that the charging power should not
the charging load and losses. The sum of them equals the exceed the maximum power. Constraints (4) describe the
injected power into the root node from the outside network. relationship between the active and reactive charging power.
With the injected power and the electricity purchase price Constraints (5) and (6) describe the relationship between the
curve, the cost of the distribution company can be obtained. injected power and the injected current at node n . In fact, they
With the normal resident load, the charging load and the are transformations of the following equation:
electricity retail price curve, the revenue of the distribution Sn ,t P + Pn0,t + jQn , t + jQn0,t
I na,t − jI nb,t = In*, t = = n ,t (8)
company can be obtained. The difference between the revenue U n ,t U na,t + jU nb,t
and the cost is the profit we try to maximize. Based on the Constraints (7) are obtained according to the Kirchhoff’s
above analysis, an optimization model can be built as follows: circuit laws. The sum of currents injected into each node in the
t max nmax
max ∑ ( β t ∑（ Pn ,t +Pn ,t） − α tV0, t I injected , t )Δt
0 a
(1) distribution equals the current injected into the root node from
t =0 n =1 the outside network ignoring the line-to-ground capacitance.
subject to: Only (5) and (6) are nonlinear among above constraints.
tmax To simplify the problem, an iterative approach is used in
∀n : μ ∑ Pn ,t ⋅ Δt = K n Cmax (2)
this paper. The nodal voltages are supposed to be known in
t =1
each iteration. Thus (5) and (6) can be regarded as linear
∀t , ∀n : 0 ≤ Pn,t ≤ Kn Pmax (3)
constraints and the optimization problem becomes a linear
1− λ 2
(4) programming problem which is rather easy to solve. After
∀t , ∀n : Qn ,t = Pn,t
λ solving the linear programming problem, the power flow is
U na,t calculated with the optimal solution, and then the nodal
∀t , ∀n : I na,t = Pn ,t + voltages are updated. Repeat this process until convergence
U na,t 2 + U nb,t 2
U b
U n ,t ⋅ Pn0,t + U nb,t ⋅ Qn0,t
a and the optimal charging power of each PEV is obtained.
n ,t
Qn ,t + (5)
U na,t 2 + U nb,t 2 U na,t 2 + U nb,t 2 C. Voltage Constraints
U b
n ,t
Uncoordinated charging of large-scale PEVs may cause
∀t , ∀n : I nb,t = a 2
Pn ,t − serious voltage drop problems in distribution networks [3].
U + U nb,t 2
n ,t
U a
U n ,t ⋅ Pn0,t − U na,t ⋅ Qn0,t
b Thus constraints of voltage magnitude limits should be
n ,t
Qn ,t + (6) considered in the model. To keep the model linear, voltage
U na,t 2 + U nb,t 2 U na,t 2 + U nb,t 2
constraints are linearized in the following.
nmax
a
∀t : I injected ,t = ∑ I na,t (7) Let’s consider the voltage constraints of node k :
U min ≤ U k ,t ≤ U max
n =1
(9)
where:
a
I injected It is supposed that node k can be reached along path l via
,t is the real part of the current injected into the root
nodes 1, ... , k − 1 starting from the root node 0. The branch
node from the outside network at time interval t .
connecting node k and node k − 1 is marked as branch k .
V0,t is the voltage magnitude of the root node at time interval Because the load flow is not calculated in the proposed
t. formulation, the following equations are derived in order to
αt is the purchase price of electricity at time interval t . calculate nodal voltage magnitudes approximately. Thus,
βt is the retail price of electricity at time interval t . constraint (9) can be taken into account and linearized.
Through a series of derivation, we can get following equations:
Δt is the time interval. In this paper its value is 15 minutes.
U k = U ka + jU kb = U k −1 + ( Rk + jX k )( I ka + jI kb ) (10)
 3

flow goes back to step 3.

⎪⎧ Rk I k − X k I k =ΔU k
a b a

⎨ b a b
(11) Step 6: Output the optimal results.
⎪⎩ Rk I k + X k I k =ΔU k
U a ΔU a +U kb−1ΔU kb III. SIMULATIONS AND ANALYSIS
U k ≈ U k −1 + k −1 k (12)
U k
A. Results of Coordinated and Uncoordinated Charging
The proposed method is tested on the 12.66kV, 33-bus
U ka−1ΔU ka +U kb−1ΔU kb
Δ U k = (13) distribution system. Fig. 2 shows the single line diagram. The
U k maximum load of the system in a day is (3715+j2300) kVA.
k The node 0 connects the distribution network and the outside
U k ≈ U 0 + ∑ Δ U n (14) network. It is a reference node and the other nodes are all PQ
(m) (m) ( m −1)
n =1 nodes.
Thus the linear voltage constraints (14) are obtained. The
detailed proof is given in the appendix.
D. Flow Chart of the Proposed Solution Method
The flow chart of the proposed solution method is shown in
Fig. 1.

Step 1 input required infomation

Fig. 2. Single line diagram of the 33-bus distribution system.
set k = 0
Step 2 the initial value of charging To calculate maximum profits the distribution company
power is Pn0,t + jQn0,t may obtain, an extreme scenario is chosen and relevant
information is given as below.
(1) PEVs are parked in fixed places like private garages and
calculate the node voltage Vnk, t+1 k =k + 1
Step 3 available for the network operator to dispatch all the day.
with Pnk, t + jQnk,t (flow calculation) (2) The initial SOC of each PEV is 0.10. PEVs should be fully
charged by the end of charging processes.
Step 4 calculate Pnk,t+1 + jQnk,+1
t
with the Vnk, t+1 (3) The maximum charging power is 3kW. The battery
(optimization method) capacity is 32kWh. The charging efficiency is 0.98.
(4) There are 240 PEVs evenly distributed in nodes of the
distribution network. Supposing the average normal electricity
consumption of a household is about 6kW, thus there are
Step 5 Pnk,t+1 − Pnk, t ≤ε ?
No about 619 households in this region. Supposing each
household owns one vehicle on average, the PEV penetration
Yes is about 38.8%.
Step 6 output the optimal results (5) Choose a typical day load curve of north China in winter
as the resident load curve, which is shown in Fig. 3. From the
Fig. 1. Flow chart of the proposed solution method for PEVs’ optimal
charging. curve we know that there are two load peaks separately at
about 11:00 and 19:00.
The following are the details of each step. (6) It’s assumed that the purchase price varies over time while
Step 1: Input the required information. The information the retail price stays the same because of the contract
includes the topology of the distribution network, parameters provisions. This assumption is not necessary for the model but
of each branch, the predicted load curve, PEVs’ charging makes it easier to analyze.
places and so forth. (7) The tolerance of convergence is set to 1e-5.
Step 2: Initialize the settings. Set the iteration index to zero. To compare with the coordinated charging scenario, an
Set values of charging power to given values. uncoordinated charging scenario is simulated. In this scenario,
Step 3: Calculate the power flow. Using the charging power once PEV owners get home from work, PEVs are connected to
optimized in the previous step, we can obtain the nodal the power network to charge. Based on the PEV owners’
voltages by power flow calculation. behavior, most of PEVs start charging from 17:30 to 20:30.
Step 4: Solve the linear programming problem. Using the The charging load peak overlaps the resident load peak.
nodal voltages obtained in power flow calculation, the According to probability distributions of some parameters
charging power can be optimized with the proposed (like the SOC, charging periods and so forth) [12], Monte
formulation. Carlo simulations are carried out for 10000 times and the
Step 5: If the difference of the charging power obtained from average profit is calculated. The comparisons between
two successive iterations is below the given level, the solution coordinated and uncoordinated charging are shown in Table I.
method converges and the flow goes to step 6. Otherwise, the
 4

Fig. 3. Day load curve of the resident load. Fig. 4. Hypothetical electricity purchase price curve to test the voltage
constraints.
From Table I, one can see that profits under the coordinated
charging scenario are 10.7% higher than those under the
uncoordinated charging scenario. However, the total losses
tmax nmax
(The expression is ∑ (V0,t I a
injected , t − ∑ Pn , t )Δt .) are almost the
t =0 n =1

same. The voltage profile is much worse for the uncoordinated

charging scenario.
B. Tests of Voltage Constraints
To test whether the voltage constraints work as expected,
the electricity purchase price curve is artificially modified to
be contrary to the actual situation. As is shown in Fig. 4, the
hypothetical curve has low values between 19:00 to 21:00,
when the normal resident load is generally rather high.
Fig. 5 shows the simulation results of scenarios with and
without voltage constraints. Without the voltage constraints
the PEVs tend to charge when the electricity purchase price is
low to get more profits, while with the voltage constraints the Fig. 5. PEV optimal charging power with and without voltage constraints.
optimization method may sacrifice some profits to satisfy the
security constraints. Detailed comparisons of related
parameters are shown in Table II. It indicates that voltage
constraints can improve voltage conditions without much loss
of profits.
C. Parameter Analysis
In this part, parameters which may affect profits, like the
electricity purchase price, PEV penetration and so forth are
analyzed.
Fig. 6 shows the relationship between the average
electricity purchase price and the profits. From this figure, it
can be seen that profits decrease as the purchase price grows.
The sensitivity is about -70.03 MWh/day.
Table III shows the relationship between profits and the
penetration level of PEVs. One can see that profits of the
charging load are almost proportional to the total number of
PEVs. The cost of losses has little growth with the increase of
Fig. 6. Relationship between the average electricity purchase price and profits
PEV number. It indicates that by using the proposed of the distribution company.
optimization method, the distribution network can
accommodate more PEVs without violating voltage limits and
obtain more profits.
 5

TABLE I
COMPARISONS BETWEEN COORDINATED AND UNCOORDINATED CHARGING
Charging mode Profits of the charging load ($/day) Minimum node voltage (p.u.) losses of the distribution network (MWh)
Coordinated charging 174.20 0.9300 2.55
Uncoordinated charging 157.35 0.9217 2.57

TABLE II
SIMULATION RESULTS OF SCENARIOS WITH AND WITHOUT VOLTAGE CONSTRAINTS
Different models Profits ($/day) Minimum voltage losses of the distribution network (MWh)
With voltage constraints 1955.25 0.9300 2.58
Without voltage constraints 1960.58 0.9189 2.60

TABLE III
PROFIT ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT PEV PENETRATION LEVELS
Number of PEVs Penetration Profits of the resident load ($/day) Profits of the charging load ($/day) cost of losses ($/day)
160 25.8% 1764.00 153.87 53.61
240 38.8% 1764.00 230.62 56.42
320 51.7% 1764.00 305.13 59.65

Let:
IV. CONCLUSIONS ⎧⎪ Rk I ka − X k I kb =ΔU ka
The PEVs coordinated charging within a distribution ⎨ b a b
⎪⎩ Rk I k + X k I k =ΔU k
network is studied in this paper. An optimal charging
formulation is built to maximize profits of the distribution and then we have:
network company while satisfying charging demand and U k = (U ka−1 + ΔU ka )2 + (U kb−1 + ΔU kb )2
network security constraints. The formulation is solved
Because the line voltage drop is much smaller than the
iteratively and a linear programming problem is built in each
nodal voltage, we can expand the above equation in the Taylor
iteration. Thus the proposed method can solve the problem
series and get:
efficiently.
a a b b
Simulation results indicated that coordinated charging can U ΔU +U k −1ΔU k
U k ≈ U k −1 + k −1 k
help distribution companies improve their profitability and the U k
distribution voltage profile. The voltage constraints considered
in this paper can improve the voltage level effectively. Some Let:
a a b b
parameters like the electricity purchase price and the PEV U ΔU +U k −1ΔU k
Δ U k = k −1 k
penetration level can significantly affect the profits obtained U k
from coordinated charging.
and then we have:
V. APPENDIX U k ≈ U k −1 +Δ U k
( m) ( m −1) ( m −1)
A. Derivation of Voltage Constraints where, m represents the current iteration number.
The voltage constraint is given below for node k at time To take advantage of more distribution information, we can
interval t . expand the above expression along the path l back. Then the
desired expression is finally obtained.
U min ≤ U k ,t ≤ U max k
It can also be represented as: U k ≈ U 0 + ∑ Δ U n
( m) (m) ( m −1)
n =1
a 2 b 2
U min ≤ U +U ≤ U max
k ,t k ,t
U k −1 is known and Δ U n can be expressed
( m −1) ( m −1)
The constraints are nonlinear constraints. To keep the
model linear, they should be linearized. linearly.
Without loss of generality, we can suppose that node k can
be reached along path l via nodes 1, ... , k starting from the VI. REFERENCES
[1] Y. H. Song, X. Yang, and Z. X. Lu, "Integration of plug-in hybrid and
root node 0. The branch connecting node k and node k − 1 is electric vehicles: experience from China," in Proc. 2010 IEEE Power
marked as branch k . Thus the following equations are and Engineering Society General Meeting, pp. 1-5.
obtained. [2] L. Dow, M. Marshall, L. Xu, J. R. Aguero, and H. L. Willis, "A novel
approach for evaluating the impact of electric vehicles on the power
U k = U + jU = U k −1 + ( Rk + jX k )( I + jI )
a
k
b
k
a
k
b
k distribution system," in Proc. 2010 IEEE Power & Engineering Society
General Meeting, pp. 1-6.
⎪⎧U k = U k −1 + Rk I k − X k I k
a a a b
[3] L. P. Fernandez, T. G. S. Roman, R. Cossent, C. M. Domingo, and P.
⎨ b b b a
Frias, "Assessment of the impact of plug-in electric vehicles on
⎪⎩U k = U k −1 + Rk I k + X k I k distribution networks," IEEE Trans. Power Systems, vol. 26, pp. 206-
213, May. 2011.
 6

[4] J. C. Gomez and M. M. Morcos, "Impact of EV bbattery chargers on the
power quality of distribution systems," IEEE Tranns. on Power Delivery,
vol. 18, pp. 975-981, Mar. 2003.
[5] P. Papadopoulos, L. M. Cipcigan, N. Jenkins, and I. Grau, "Distribution
networks with electric vehicles," in Proc. 2009 IEEEE Universities Power
Engineering Conf., pp. 1-5.
[6] F. J. Soares, J. A. P. Lopes, and P. M. R. Almeeida, "A Monte Carlo
method to evaluate electric vehicles impacts in disttribution networks," in
Proc. 2010 IEEE Innovative Technologies for an Efficient and Reliable
Electricity Supply Conf., pp. 365-372.
[7] L. Kelly, A. Rowe, and P. Wild, "Analyzing thhe impacts of plug-in
electric vehicles on distribution networks in Britishh Columbia," in Proc.
2009 IEEE Electrical Power Energy Conf., pp. 1-66.
[8] K. Clement-Nyns, E. Haesen, and J. Driesen, "Thhe impact of charging
plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on a residential distribution grid," IEEE
Trans. on Power Systems, vol. 25, pp. 371-380, Febb. 2010.
[9] M. Singh, I. Kar, and P. Kumar, "Influence of EV on grid power quality
and optimizing the charging schedule to mitigate vvoltage imbalance and
reduce power loss," in Proc. 2010 IEEE Power Ellectronics and Motion
Control Conf., pp. 196-203.
[10] E. Sortomme, M. M. Hindi, S. D. J. MacPhersonn, and S. S. Venkata,
"Coordinated charging of plug-in hybrid electricc vehicle to minimize
distribution system losses," IEEE Trans. on Smartt Grid, vol. 2, pp. 198-
205, Mar. 2010.
[11] S. Deilami, A. S. Masoum, P. S. Moses, and M. A A. S. Masoum, "Real-
time coordination of plug-in electric vehicle chargging in smart girds to
minimize power losses and improve voltage proffile," IEEE Trans. on
Smart Grid, vol. 2, pp. 456-467, Mar. 2011.
[12] Z. W. Luo, Y. H. Song, Z. C. Hu, Z. W. Xu, X. Y Yang, and K. Q. Zhan,
"Forecasting charging load of plug-in electric vvehicles in China," in
Proc. 2011 IEEE Power and Energy Society Generral Meeting, pp. 1-8.
VII. BIOGRAPHIES
Kaiqiao Zhan was born inn March, 1989. He
received his Bachelor's degrree in 2010 and is
pursuing his Ph.D. degree inn the Department of
Electrical Engineering at Tsinghua University
(THU), Beijing, China. He woorks in the Smart Grid
Operation and Optimization L Laboratory (SGOOL)
as a research assistant. Kaiqiaao's research interests
include electric vehicles aand power systems
modeling and operations.
Tsinghua University in February 2009 as a Professor at the Department of
Electrical Engineering. In April 2009, he wass appointed Assistant President of
the University and Deputy Director of the Laaboratory of Low-Carbon Energy.
In June 2009, he was elected Vice-President of Chinese Society for Electrical
Engineering (CSEE) and appointed Chairm man of the International Affairs
Committee of the CSEE. His research areass include Smart Grid, electricity
economics, and operation and control of poweer systems.
Zhuowei Luo was born in May 1984. He received
his M.S. degree in 2008 at Hunan University,
Changsha, China. HeH is pursuing his Ph.D. degree in
the Department of Electrical Engineering at
Tsinghua University y (THU), Beijing, China. He is a
member of the team t working on Smart Grid
Operation and Optimmization Laboratory (SGOOL) at
Tsinghua Universitty. His fields of interest include
electric vehicles an
nd power systems modeling and
operations.
Zhiwei Xu was born in August 1989. He is currently
a Ph.D. candidate in Department of Electric
Engineering at Tsin nghua University. He works in the
Smart Grid Operatiion and Optimization Laboratory
(SGOOL) as a reseearch assistant. Zhiwei's research
interests include eleectric vehicles and power systems
modeling and operaations.
Long Jia was born n in Oct 1988. He received his
Bachelor's degree in
n 2011 and is pursuing his Ph.D.
degree in the Depaartment of Electrical Engineering
at Tsinghua Universsity (THU), Beijing, China. He is
a member of the team working on Smart Grid
Operation and Optimmization Laboratory (SGOOL) at
Tsinghua Universitty. He is also an IEEE student
member. His fields of interest include power system
modelling and operaations and electric vehicles.

Zechun Hu was born in Nanjing, China. He

received the B.S. degree andd Ph.D. degree from
Xi’an Jiao Tong University, Shhaanxi, China, in 2000
and 2006, respectively. He woorked in Shanghai Jiao
Tong University after graduation and also worked in
University of Bath as a research officer from 2009 to
2010. He joined the Depaartment of Electrical
Engineering at Tsinghua Univversity in 2010 where
he is now an associate professoor. His major research
interests include optimal plaanning, operation of
power systems and electric vehhicles.

Yonghua Song was born inn January 1964. He

received his BEng and P PhD from Chengdu
University of Science and Teechnology, and China
Electric Power Research Instittute in 1984 and 1989
respectively. He was a Postdoctoral Fellow at
Tsinghua University from Junee 1989 to March 1991.
He then held various positionss at Bristol University,
Bath University and John Mooores University from
1991 to 1996. In January 19997, he was appointed
Professor of Power Systems at Brunel University
where he was Pro-Vice Chaancellor for Graduate
Studies from August 2004. In 2002, he was awarrded DSc by Brunel
University for his original achievements in power systeem research. In 2004,
he was elected Fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineeering (UK). In January
2007, he took up a Pro-Vice Chancellorship and Profeessorship of Electrical
Engineering at the University of Liverpool. In 2008, he was elected Fellow of
the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (UUSA). He returned to

View publication stats