CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 4, NO.

4, DECEMBER 2018 417

Market-oriented Optimal Dispatching Strategy

for a Wind Farm with a Multiple Stage Hybrid
Energy Storage System
Zhenyuan Zhang, Member, IEEE, Yun Zhang, Student Member, IEEE, Qi Huang, Senior Member, IEEE and
Wei-Jen Lee, Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—With the increased promotion of integrated energy Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) sourced 11.7
power systems (IEPS), renewable energy and energy storage percent of its electric energy from wind in 2015 [2].
systems (ESS) play a more important role. However, the fluc-
tuation and intermittent nature of wind not only results in Cumulative MW IA Signed-Financial IA Signed-No
substantial reliability and stability defects, but it also weakens the Installed Security Posted Financial Security
competitiveness of wind generation in the electric power market. 35,000 MW
Meanwhile, the way to further enhance the system reliability
30,000 MW  

effectively improving market profits of wind farms is one of the  

 

most important aspects of Wind-ESS joint operational design. In 25,000 MW 

 
 
 
this paper, a market-oriented optimized dispatching strategy for a 20,000 MW  
 
wind farm with a multiple stage hybrid ESS is proposed. The first 15,000 MW  
  
stage ESS is designed to improve the profits of wind generation 10,000 MW  
   
   
 
 

through day-ahead market operations, the real-time market-  

5,000 MW  
based second stage ESS is focused on day-ahead forecasting       
 

error elimination and wind power fluctuation smoothing, while 0 MW

the backup stage ESS is associated with them to provide the
ancillary service. An interval forecasting method is adopted to
help to ensure reliable forecast results of day-ahead wind power,
electricity prices and loads. With this hybrid ESS design, supply
reliability and market profits are simultaneously achieved for
wind farms.
Index Terms—Dispatching optimization, energy storage,
integrated energy power systems, interval forecasting, power
market, p2g, wind power generation.
I. I NTRODUCTION
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
Fig. 1. ERCOT Wind Installations by Year [2].
However, the intermittent and fluctuating nature of wind
results in substantial defects in the reliability and stability
of the grid, but also diminishes the market competitiveness
for wind power generation itself [3]. With the promotion of
integrated energy power systems (IEPS), and energy storage
systems (ESS), which operate jointly with renewable power
generation, it is assumed that this will be a practical solution
to enhance the reliability of renewable energies [4], [5]. In
many rich renewable energy resource areas, the installation
of ESS has become mandatory. For example, the California

W IND power generation has rapidly developed over the

last few decades, driven by limited fossil fuel supplies
and environmental pollution concerns. According to the report
of the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC), there were 60
GW of new wind generation systems installed in 2015 [1].
Meanwhile, the natural advantage of low marginal cost for
wind resources gains an extensive interest from the electric
power market. In the market of Texas, as shown in Fig. 1, the
Manuscript received February 5, 2018; revised June 4, 2018; accepted June
5, 2018; date of publication December 30, 2018; date of current version
September 20, 2018.
This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (No. 51607025).
Z. Y. Zhang (corresponding author, email: zhangzhenyuan@uestc.edu.cn),
Y. Zhang and Q. Huang are with the University of Electronic Science and
Technology of China, Chengdu 611731, China
W. J. Lee is with the University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX 76019,
USA
DOI: 10.17775/CSEEJPES.2018.00130
Public Utilities Commission set an energy storage goal for
utilities of installing 1.3 GW batteries by 2020 [6].
To achieve a better co-operation performance of wind-ESS,
various designs and control schemes have been studied from
different aspects, such as ESS sizing optimization, power qual-
ity control, and energy dispatching management. Traditional
wind-ESS dispatching primarily focuses on wind fluctuation
suppression and operational cost minimization. However, with
more wind power generation actively evolving into the market
competition, effectively improving market profits of wind
farms while ensuring system reliability is the new mission
for Wind-ESS energy management design.
Although the most common hybrid ESS optimization
methods, such as fuzzy logic based hierarchical optimization,
and multi-objective based discrete optimization approaches are

2096-0042 © 2018 CSEE

418 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 4, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2018
showing good potential on wind fluctuation suppression, the
way to improve market profits of wind generation are not
described. For example, a multi-objective optimization algo-
rithm provided by [9] effectively reduced the wind fluctuation
and ESS sizes, but with this scheme, the revenue of wind
generation is only 1.24 $/MW, which cannot even cover the
fixed operational costs of wind generation. In another case,
the market-based ESS dispatch strategy from [10], provided
a very promising financial improvement plan for wind farms,
however, the integrated power fluctuation increased 21.3% at
maximum utilization. Based on the foregoing review, there is a
clear dilemma in market profit increment and wind fluctuation
smoothing controls which requires some tradeoff to be made
between each of them, especially for relatively large price
variation occurrences.
Thus, to achieve the maximum market profit while limiting
the fluctuation of the integrated wind generation within a rea-
sonable range, this paper proposes a market-oriented optimal
dispatching strategy for wind generation with a multiple stage
hybrid ESS. The first stage ESS is designed for the day-ahead
market (DAM), a lead-acid battery ESS is operated with wind
generation to achieve maximum market profits. A real-time
market (RTM) based second stage lithium-ion battery ESS
is focused on wind power forecasting error elimination and
fluctuation smoothing. A hydrogen combined cycle energy
storage system (HCCESS) consisting of a backup stage ESS
is designed for storing the excessive power when the ESS is
fully charged and is earning the extra income from the an-
cillary service provided. Additionally, a two-phase forecasting
method for wind power, price and load is also proposed to
ensure the robustness of the forecasting approach.
The paper is organized as follows: Section II introduces
the forecasting method for wind power, electricity price and
the load profile. Section III describes the configuration of
the multiple stage ESS. Section IV optimizes the Wind-
ESS dispatch plan for the DAM and RTM. Case studies are
provided in section V.
II. DAY- AHEAD F ORECASTING OF W IND P OWER ,
E LECTRICITY P RICE AND L OAD P ROFILE
In most power markets, the wind farm usually participants
in the real-time market as a price taker [11], [12], which
significantly relies on a good forecast of wind generation,
electricity market price and load profiles. Thus, to carry
out the dispatching optimization of a wind-ESS, the reliable
forecasting on these associated variables are a prerequisite.
A. Wind Power Forecasting
Wind power prediction is an important and yet challenging
subject due to the stochastic nature of wind. Although recent
works, such as statistical modeling and physical modeling,
have improved the accuracy of wind forecasting by adopting
more sophisticated functional kernels or including more algo-
rithm inputs, the issue of prediction robustness in day-ahead
pre-dispatching still remains. To achieve a reliable forecasting
for day-ahead pre-dispatching uses, in this section, a two-phase
wind power forecasting algorithm is proposed. An artificial
neural network (ANN) based phase 1 short-term preliminary
deterministic forecasting approach aims to accurately depict
the trend of wind power variations; a long-term forecasting
error based phase 2 refining stage is subsequently adopted,
which uses the interval-predication method to ensure the
robustness of the predictions.
1) ANN Based Phase 1 Forecasting
An ANN is a widely used learning algorithm, inspired
by biological neural networks, which is capable of nonlinear
approximation-oriented forecasting [13], [14]. In this paper,
for training purposes, a 1-week historical wind generation
output data from a single wind farm in West Texas is available
for use in the forecasting process. The corresponding meteo-
rological data is also obtained, which includes wind speed,
temperature, humidity, atmosphere pressure, etc.
To reduce the training burden and prevent overfitting, a
limited number of inputs have to be screened out through pa-
rameter sensitivity analysis. Trajectory sensitivity is the most
widely used parameter sensitivity evaluation tool, which can
quantify the variation of the system trajectory corresponding
to a tiny change of the parameter, which can be generally
defined as follows:
∂yi (θ, k) yi (θj + ∆θj , k) − yi (θj , k)
= lim (1)
∂θj ∆θj →0 ∆θj
where yi is the trajectory of variable i; θj is the parameter j;
m is the total number of parameters; k is sampling time (1
hour for this paper).
Therefore, according to (1), the first five most sensitive
parameters, which include wind speed, wind direction, tem-
perature, humidity and pressure, are selected as the input data
set for ANN training. The prediction models are then trained
by a three layer ANN for wind power forecasting, while the
input layer has 32 neurons, the output layer has 1 neuron for
wind power output, and the hidden layer is calculated to have
24 neurons. The training data from May 11 to May 17 are
used to train the network, and data for May 18 are used for
validation. Fig. 2 shows the prediction result of the wind power
output of May 18.
70
Actual Wind Power
65 Forecast Wind Power
60
Power /MW
55
50
45
40
35
30
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Time interval /1h
Fig. 2. Forecast and actual wind power on May 18th .
Compared with the actual wind power output on May 18th,
the phase 1 forecast result can basically match the variation
trend on wind generation. However, in certain time ranges, the
ZHANG et al.: MARKET-ORIENTED OPTIMAL DISPATCHING STRATEGY FOR A WIND FARM WITH A MULTIPLE STAGE HYBRID ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM 419

forecasted outputs are higher than the actual one, which could 120
cause the over dispatching on DAM energy management.
Thus, to enhance the reliability of the forecasting result, the 100
phase 2 refining process will be taken into consideration.
2) Interval-predication Based Phase 2 Forecasting 80

Frequency
In this section, an interval prediction method is introduced to
improve the robustness of the preliminary forecasting results. 60
As one of the typical stochastic forecasting methods, interval
prediction refines the deterministic forecasting results by using 40
the probability distributions of long-term wind power predic-
tion errors. Through the statistical analysis of the prediction 20
errors, the confidence interval of the given confidence can be
obtained [15]–[19].
0
Assume the deterministic point forecasted value of time t −0.30 −0.20 −0.10 0.00 0.10
is L and the probability distribution of the prediction error is Relative Errors %
f (x), the interval prediction model is shown by the equation
Fig. 3. Historical wind power forecasting error distribution.
below:
J(β) = [L + f −1 (α), L + f −1 (α)] (2) where β is the confidence level, usually taken as 0.95.
Because the Normal distribution shows up in specific sym-
α−α=1−β (3)
metries of the samplings, the probability interval can be
where β is the confidence level, the value interval [0, 1]; L + rewritten as:
f −1 (α) and L + f −1 (α) are the upper and lower limits of the α = 1 − α = β/2 (8)
predicted interval, respectively. By considering the inherent output of the wind turbine
The relative error is used to calculate the probability of the generator upper and lower limits, the minimum and maximum
error distribution. Relative errors are usually defined in two of the wind forecasted interval should follow the constraints
ways: as shown below:
1. The ratio of the prediction error to the actual power;
2. The ratio of the prediction error to the total installed Pmax = min(P + f −1 (α), PW, max ) (9)
capacity of wind power. Pmin = max(P + f −1 (α), PW, min ) (10)
The relative error of the first definition is greatly influenced
by the actual value, especially when the power is very low or where PW, max and PW, min are the total upper and lower
approximately zero, the relative error is large or even infinite. limits of the wind power output; Pmax and Pmin are the
Therefore, the second definition is adopted in this paper, which maximum and minimum of the interval.
is expressed as: Thus, to ensure the reliability of the forecast results, from
P − Pr the worst scenario, set the 95% confidence interval as the final
e= (4) day-ahead wind forecast results for DAM dispatching uses,
Pt
which is shown in Fig. 4.
where P is the preliminary forecasted wind power, Pr is the
actual wind power, and Pt is the total installed capacity of 70 Actual Wind Power
wind power. Forecast Wind Power
65 95% Confidence Forecast Wind Power
In accordance with the actual and forecasted wind power in
the last 3 months (from March 17th to May 17th), by using the 60
ANN mentioned above, the error distribution of the forecasted
55
Power /MW

wind power can be obtained as shown in Fig. 3.

From Fig. 3, the 3-month forecasting error conforms to the 50
Normal Distribution, which can be expressed as:
45
1 (x−µ)2
f (x) = √ e− 2σ2 (5) 40
σ 2π Z
x 35
1 (t−µ)2
F (x) = √ e− 2σ2 dt (6)
σ 2π −∞ 30
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
where x is the relative error, µ and σ are −0.02 and 0.081, Time interval /1h
respectively.
Fig. 4. Wind power forecasting refined by the interval prediction method.
Thus, according to the phase 1 preliminary forecasting
results P and the forecasting error distribution function f (x), B. Electricity Price and Load Profile Forecasting
an interval of forecasting is drawn as:
In deregulated markets, due to the fluctuation in power
J(β) = [P + f −1 (α), P + f −1 (α)] (7) supply and demand, the electricity price, as determined with
420 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 4, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2018

the locational marginal price (LMP), fluctuates frequently, with
the peak-hour price even being several times higher than the
off-peak, which may significantly affect the market profits
of wind generation. Therefore, in addition to wind power
generation, prediction of the LMP and load profile is also
needed.
Similar to the wind prediction, a two-phase forecasting
algorithm is also applied to the day-ahead hourly LMP and
load forecasting in this paper. The 3-month historical hourly
LMP and load profile in the nearest node of the wind farm,
obtained from ERCOT, are used for the study.
Throughout the trajectory sensitivity analysis discussed
above, the training data feeding the ANN input layer to
forecast the LMP are as follows: temperature, system load and
price lagging factors; the input for load profile forecasting are:
temperatures, real-time prices and timing factors.
For LMP forecasting, the input layer has 20 neurons,
the hidden layer is calculated to have 12 neurons; for load
forecasting, the input layer has 12 neurons, and the hidden
layer is calculated to have 5 neurons.
The lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of the
forecasting results, which are illustrated in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6,
are used in the subsequent optimization process.
35
Actual Price
Forecast Price
30
95% Confidence
Forecast Price
25
20
Price /$
phase” for the next operating day, which ensures that adequate
resources are scheduled to meet the next day’s anticipated
demand while allowing the market participants to lock in
pricing prior to real time; RTM balances the energy supply
with demand every 15 minutes at the least possible cost while
maintaining reliable system conditions.
Thus, in order to better adapt the market operational mode, a
multiple stage ESS is specifically designed. The energy storage
devices and the corresponding sizes for each stage of the ESS
are selected, according to the installation capacity of the wind
farm (72 MW in the paper), forecasted wind power and loads.
A. First Stage ESS
The first stage ESS adjusts to increase the revenue of the
wind farm through the DAM settlement. As the described
function of the DAM, the first stage ESS should have a
large capacity, long duration energy storage and relatively
low operational costs. Among different types of bulk energy
storage devices with matured adoption, utility scaled lead-acid
batteries are suggested because of their technology maturity,
large storage capacity, long storage period, high efficiency, low
capital cost per unit energy, low maintenance and replacement
costs [20], [21].
Referring to industry practices, when the size of the ESS
is equal to 15%−20% of wind farm capacity, it is suggested
as an approach to perform an effective time-shift of energy
delivery and grid operational support [22], [26]. Therefore,
the 115 MWh utility scale lead-acid battery is selected as the
first stage ESS.

15 B. Second Stage ESS

10 The second ESS is incorporated with the same day trading
session, which is responsible for balancing the forecasting
5
errors and smoothing the integrated power. Compared with the
first stage ESS, the second ESS requires smaller installation
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Time interval /1h
capacity but more stringent requirements on response time.
Being highly modular and having low standby losses, lithium-
Fig. 5. LMP forecasting results by using the interval forecasting method. ion batteries are chosen to be a reasonable solution for second
stage ESS, which can respond very rapidly (less than 1 s) to
65
Actual Load smooth out wind generation changes and cogenerated power,
Forecast Load meanwhile providing high recharge efficiency (88%−95%),
60 95% Confidence
Forecast Load long cycle life, and potential lower cost [21], [22].
55
The total energy capacity for secondary stage ESS is set as
Power /MW

50 1 h of the average wind power mismatches (a forecasting error

of 95% confidence interval is 13.29% in this study), which is
45 4 MWh. Thus, 4 MWh lithium-ion batteries are selected as
40 the second stage ESS.

35 C. Backup Stage ESS

30
In traditional Wind-ESS joint operations, when the ESS is
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 fully charged, the excessive wind generation will be dissipated
Time interval /1h by the dump load. To avoid the wasting of energy, a backup
Fig. 6. Load profile forecasting results by using the interval forecasting
stage ESS, which shifts the excessive power to peak load hours
method. then obtains the payment for ancillary service, is necessary to
improve the reliability and increase the market profits of the
III. C ONFIGURATION OF THE M ULTIPLE S TAGE ESS wind farm.
In deregulated markets, DAM and RTM are running in To ensure the immediacy of ancillary support, the backup
different ways: DAM serves as an hourly based “planning stage ESS requires a large spinning reserve with short ramping
ZHANG et al.: MARKET-ORIENTED OPTIMAL DISPATCHING STRATEGY FOR A WIND FARM WITH A MULTIPLE STAGE HYBRID ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM 421

time. Compared to pump storage (landscape required), super Since the purpose of this paper is to design the dispatching
capacitor (temperature resisted), diesel generator (capacity strategy of the wind farm with multiple stages of hybrid ESS,
limited), coal generation (slow ramping rate), the power to the installation costs of the ESS are not considered in the
gas (P2G) based hydrogen combined cycle energy storage calculation.
system (HCCESS) has a short ramping time, large reserve The optimization is subject to the following constraints.
capacity and is easy to install, which is widely used in DAM power balance constraints (based on forecasting):
electric co-generation, standby power and distributed power
Pgf (i) = Pw (i) + Pc1 (i) + Peb (i) (12)
supply of the IEPS [23]–[25]. Thus, HCCESS is chosen as the
backup stage ESS. According to the 3-month historical average P (i) = Pw (i) + Pd1 (i) + Pas (i) (13)
shortcomings between wind generation and load demands, in P (i) = PLf (i) (14)
this study, a 97 MWh HCCESS is chosen to act as the backup PLf (i) ≥ Pw (i) ≥ 0 (15)
stage ESS.
First stage ESS power constraints:
 
[E1 max − E1 (i − 1)] max
IV. M ARKET- ORIENTED W IND -ESS D ISPATCHING 0 ≤ Pc1 (i) ≤ min Pw (i), , Pc1
O PTIMIZATION η1 t
(16)
A. DAM Dispatching Optimization 
[E1 (i − 1) − E1 min ] max

0 ≤ Pd1 (i) ≤ min , Pd1 (17)
As mentioned above, in the DAM, increasing the market η1 t
profits of the wind farm is the priority goal. According to Backup ESS power constraints:
the day-ahead forecasting results of wind power, LMP and
max
load, the available wind power can be pre-dispatched to deliver 0 ≤ Peb (i) ≤ min[Pg (i) − PLf (i) − Pc1 (i), Peb ] (18)
 
power to the grid or stored as the energy source for the Eh (i) max
0 ≤ Pas (i) ≤ min PLf (i)−Pg (i)−Pdh (i), ,P
first/backup stage ESS. ηHCCESS t as
Once the first stage ESS is fully charged, the excessive (19)
power will be stored in HCCESS as the backup power source ESS energy constraints:
to provide the ancillary service. The DAM Wind-ESS opera-
tion scheme is shown in Fig. 7. Emin ≤ E(i) ≤ Emax (20)
E(i) = E(i − 1) + ηPc (i) (21)
1st Stage ESS where t is the DAM operation time, Pgf is the low bound
Pd1 of the interval forecasted day-ahead wind power, Pw is the
Pc1 integrated wind power, P is the total integrated power (wind
Pg Pw + P
Wind Power Grid and ESS), PLf is the forecasted load profile, Pc1 and Pd1 are
Peb + max max
the charge and discharge power of the ESS, Pc1 and Pd1
Pas are the maximum of charging and discharging in each trading
Backup Stage ESS cycle, η1 is the efficiency of the first stage ESS, ηHCCESS is
the efficiency of the HCCESS, Eh is the energy stored in the
Fig. 7. DAM operation of Wind-ESS. backup stage ESS, Peb and Pas are the power of charge and
max max
discharge for the backup stage ESS, Peb and Pas are the
The DAM profit of the wind-ESS is calculated by the maximum of charging and discharging in each trading cycle
total amount of power sold from the Wind-ESS in each hour for the backup stage ESS, E is the energy stored in the ESS,
at a different LMP, including the ancillary service incomes Emax and Emin are the energy capacity limits of the ESS.
while subtracting the fixed operational cost of the ESS and B. RTM Dispatching Optimization
maintenance fees of the HCCESS. Thus, to maximize the total
In RTM, the actual wind power output and load demand may
profits of the Wind-ESS system, the optimization function is
differ from the day-ahead forecasting. To amend the deviations
defined as:
and then determine the intraday dispatch plan, the second ESS
n
X will operate with the backup stage ESS to balance the power
max P (i) × LM Pf (i) − PESS (i) × Cf
mismatches and smooth the integrated power.
i=1

To optimize the RTM operation of the wind-ESS, NSGA-II,
− Peb × Cm + Pas (i) × Ca (11)
a typical multi-objective optimization algorithm, is used in this
where i is the number of the DAM trading cycle, P (i) is section. Generally, NSGA-II has the mathematical description
the total power integration, LM Pf is the day-ahead forecasted as follows:
electricity price, Pas is the power provided through the ancil- min[f1 (θ), f2 (θ), . . . fm (θ)]
lary service, Cf is the fixed operational cost for the ESS, Ca is 
the ancillary service income for per MW, Peb is the excessive lb ≤ θ ≤ ub

power stored in the backup stage ESS, Cm is the operational s.t. Aeq ∗ θ = beq (22)

cost for HCCESS. A∗θ ≤b

422 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 4, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2018

where f (θ) is the optimized sub-objective function; lb and farm in ERCOT, which is illustrated in Section-II. The wind,
ub are the lower and upper limits of the set of identified load and electricity price prediction results for the day-ahead
parameters θ; Aeq ∗ θ = beq is the linear constraint of θ; are plotted in Figs. 4 to 6, respectively. The capacity and types
A∗θ ≤ b is the nonlinear constraint of θ. In this paper, we only for each stage of the ESS are determined in Section-III.
adopt the upper and lower limits of the identified parameters Additionally, the following assumptions are considered for
as the constraints. the simulation:
By coordinating the relationships between the sub-objective 1) For the first stage ESS, the maximum of charging and
functions, the Pareto optimal solution set is found that can discharging power is 20 MW for each time interval; the
make each sub-objective function reach its optimum as much minimum storage capacity of the first stage ESS is set as 23
as possible [27]. MWh; the efficiency of the lead-acid battery is 91%; and the
According to the algorithm of NSGA-II, the RTM optimiza- fixed operational cost is 0.74 $/MW [21].
tion function can be expressed as: 2) For the secondary stage ESS, the maximum of charging
and discharging power in each time interval is 10 MW;
M inJ(ik ) = M SEk (23)
 v efficiency is 95%; and the fixed operational cost is 0.91
u n $/MW [21].
uX
M SE R = 1 t

(Pact (i) − PL (i))2




 k
n t=1 3) For the backup stage ESS, the price of the ancillary
v (24) service is set to be 5% more than the real-time electricity
u n price; the overall efficiency of the energy storage system is
uX
M SE F = 1 t


(Pact (i) − Pact (i − 1))2

 k the electrolysis water efficiency multiplied by the fuel cell

 n t=1
efficiency [23]–[25]:
where i is the number of the RTM trading cycle, which is ηe × ηf = 80% × 69% = 55% (30)
15 min according to ERCOT protocol, Pact is the actual total
power integration, PL is the actual load on RTM, M SEkR To solve the optimization problems, the toolbox of the CVX
is the mean square error of mismatches between the RTM and NSGA-II in MATLAB are used for the DAM and RTM
integrated power and load, M SEkF is used to describe the dispatching optimization, respectively. The dispatching results
fluctuations of the integrated power in each of the adjacent of the wind generation and ESS are plotted in Fig. 8 to Fig. 9.
trading cycles. Figure 8 shows the operational strategy of the first stage ESS
The following constraints also need to be considered during in the DAM. The charging and discharging status of the ESS
the RTM optimization process. are plotted on the left Y-axis. The energy capacity changes of
RTM power balance constraints: the ESS are plotted on the right Y-axis. In the DAM, the ESS
is under the charging mode between 1:00 to 7:00, when the
Pact (i) = P (i) + Pmis (i) (25)
wind power is primarily generated (refer to Fig. 4). When the
Pwa (i) = Pw (i) + Pmisw (i) (26) LMP is gradually increasing to peak from 11:00 to 16:00, the
ESS is automatically switching to discharge mode, associated
Second stage ESS power constraints:
  with wind generation to support the peak load (refer to Fig. 5
[E2 max − E2 (i − 1)] max and Fig. 6). In the meantime, it is making the most of the
0 ≤ Pc2 (i) ≤ min Pmisw (i), , Pc2
η2 t incremental market income.
(27)
  30 150
[E2 (i − 1) − E2 min ] max 1st Stage ESS Discharge
0 ≤ Pd2 (i) ≤ min , Pd2 (28) 1st Stage ESS Charge
η2 t Total Energy of 1st Stage ESS

Ancillary Service constraints:

Energy /MWh

20 100
Power /MW

Pas RT (i) = Pas (i) + Pmisl (i) (29)

where t is the RTM operation time, Pmis , Pmisw and Pmisl 10 50
are the mismatched integrated power, wind power and load
from the DAM to RTM, E2 is the energy stored in the second
stage ESS, E2 max and E2 min are the energy capacity limits
0 0
of the second stage ESS, Pc2 and Pd2 are the charge and 0 4 8 12 16 20 24
max max Time interval /1 hour
discharge power of the second stage ESS, Pc2 and Pd2
are the maximum of charging and discharging in each trading
Fig. 8. DAM ESS dispatching results for May 18th .
cycle.

The second stage ESS is operating as shown in Fig. 9.

V. C ASE S IMULATION AND D ISCUSSION Unlike the DAM, RTM changes its operational interval from
The proposed strategy is evaluated by a 72 MW wind farm one hour to 15 min, and the second stage ESS is activated
from West Texas on May 18th. The corresponding price and to adjust the DAM dispatch plan according to the mismatches
load data are determined from the nearest node of the wind actual and forecasted wind generation and load profile.
ZHANG et al.: MARKET-ORIENTED OPTIMAL DISPATCHING STRATEGY FOR A WIND FARM WITH A MULTIPLE STAGE HYBRID ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM 423

10 2nd Stage ESS Discharge 5 Actual Load

2nd Stage ESS Charge Integrated Power with 1st Stage ESS
Total Energy of 2nd Stage ESS 70
Integrated Power with 1st and 2nd
8 4 65 Stage ESS
Integrated Powe with 1st, 2nd and
Backup Stage ESS

Energy /MWh
60
Power /MW

6 3

Power /MW
55

4 2 50
45
2 1
40
35
0 0
0 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96
30
Time interval /15 mins 0 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96
Time interval /15 mins
Fig. 9. RTM ESS dispatching results for May 18th .
Fig. 11. integrated power from multiple stage wind-ESS on May 18th .
Through the employment of the backup stage ESS, the
midnight excessive wind generation is shifted to support the
In terms of market profits and the smoothness, the dispatch
demands during the peak hours. To take advantage of the high
plans are compared and summarized in Table I.
LMP, backup stage ESS responds to the short generation and
voluntarily provides the ancillary service from 14:00 to 21:00, TABLE I
as shown in Fig. 10. C OMPARISON OF M ARKET P ROFITS

Total Revenue ($) Smoothness

Backup Stage ESS Discharge Proposed Dispatching Plan 12609.16 2.34
50 120
Backup Stage ESS Charge Traditional Dispatching Plan 10451.39 3.16
Total Energy of Backup Stage ESS Increase (%) 20.62% 25.95%
40 96

From Table I, with the proposed multiple stages of the

Energy /MWh
Power /MW

30 72 Wind-ESS dispatching strategy, the wind farm can achieve a

profitable return from the power market. The total revenue of
20 48 the wind farm is increased by 20.62%, from $10,451.39 to
$12,609.16. The fluctuation is limited into a very promising
10 24 range, which ensures the reliable usage of the wind power.

0 0 VI. C ONCLUSION
0 8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96
In this paper, the optimized multiple stages of the Wind-
Time interval /15 mins
ESS dispatching strategy are developed, which are based on
Fig. 10. Backup stage ESS dispatching results for May 18th . the different operational modes of the deregulated electricity
power market. According to the interval forecasting results
Figure 11 shows the integrated power in different stages of of the day-ahead wind generation, LMP and load conditions,
the ESS operating to support the load. By adopting the sec- the first stage lead-acid battery ESS is primarily arranged to
ondary stage ESS, the smoothness of the integrated power is increase the wind farm revenue through the DAM operation.
obviously improved, while the backup stage ESS is operating The second stage lithium-ion battery ESS places emphasis on
to provide the additional support during the peak-hours. Thus, the RTM, which takes on the role to eliminate forecasting
throughout the coordination of the multiple stage ESS, the total errors and smooth the wind fluctuation. The HCCESS based
integrated power from the wind farm is completely matched backup stage ESS is designed for storing the excessive wind
with the load demand. generation and provide the ancillary service. A case study for
The total profit of the wind farm can be then calculated as a typical summer operation day is performed. The simulation
follows: results show that a large market profit can be effectively
n
achieved by using the proposed Wind-ESS dispatch strategy.
X
Pact (i) × LM PRT (i) − PESS (i) × Cf
R EFERENCES
i=1
[1] Market Forecast for 2016–2020 [Online]. Available: http://www.gwec.


− Peb RT × Cm + Pas-RT (i) × Ca (31)
net/global-figures/market-forecast-2012-2016/.
[2] ERCOT Generator Interconnection Status Report [Online]. Available:
And the smoothness of the integrated power from the wind http://www.ercot.com/content/wcm/lists/143978/GIS REPORT Decem-
farm is evaluated by the index of Plevel : ber 2017.xlsx.
[3] P. Yu, Y. Zhao, W. Zhou, S, Hui, C. H. Quan, J. Liu, Y. W. Song, and Y.
n
X Liu, “Research on the method based on hybrid energy storage system for
Plevel(i) = (|Pact (i) − Pact (i − 1)| /Pt ) (32) balancing fluctuant wind power,” Power System Protection and Control,
i=1 vol. 39, no. 24, pp. 35–40, Dec. 2011.
424 CSEE JOURNAL OF POWER AND ENERGY SYSTEMS, VOL. 4, NO. 4, DECEMBER 2018
[4] Z. Y. Zhang, Y. Zhang, and W. J. Lee, “Energy storage based optimal
dispatch scheme for financial improvement and fluctuation mitigation
on wind power generation,” in 2017 IEEE Industry Applications Society
Annual Meeting, Cincinnati, OH, Oct. 1–5, 2017, pp. 1–7.
[5] M. Ding, Z. Chen, J. H. Su, Z. Chen, J. F. Wu, and C. Z. Zhu,
“An overview of battery energy storage system for renewable energy
generation,” Automation of Electric Power System, vol. 37, pp. 19–25,
102, Jan. 2013
[6] CPUC, Decision Adopting Energy Storage Procurement Framework and
Design Program, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2013. [Online]. Available:
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/electric/storage.htm.
[7] M. A. Chowdhury, N. Hosseinzadeh, and W. Shen, “Fuzzy logic systems
for pitch angle controller for smoothing wind power fluctuations during
below rated wind incidents,” in IEEE Trondheim PowerTech, Jun. 19–23,
2011, pp. 224–233.
[8] P. Yang and Y. W. Ma, “Application of energy storage technology in
wind power generation,” Journal of Systems Science and Mathematical
Sciences, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 410–417, Apr. 2012.
[9] L. Chen, Q. huang, and C. Chen, “Strategy on wind power smooth-
ing subject to target parameters and energy-storage capacity,” Electric
Power, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 63–69, Jun. 2013.
[10] M. Liu, F. L. Quilumba, and W. J. Lee, “Dispatch scheduling for a wind
farm with hybrid energy storage based on wind and LMP forecasting,”
IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 1970–
1976, May. 2015.
[11] ERCOT 101 [Online], Available: http://www.ercot.com/content/wcm/tra-
ining courses/14/nodal101 september 2013.pdf
[12] ERCOT Nodal Protocols. Section 6: Adjustment Period and Real-Time
Operations [Online], Available: www.ercot.com/mktrules/nprotocols/
library
[13] X. C. Zhu, “Research on power conversion and energy management
in fuel cell generating system,” Ph.D. dissertation, Zhejiang University,
Hangzhou, 2009.
[14] S. Fan, J. R. Liao, R. Yokoyama, L. N. Chen, and W. J. Lee, “Forecasting
the wind generation using a two-stage network based on meteorological
information,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, vol. 24, no. 2,
pp. 474–482, Jun. 2009.
[15] S. Viswanathan, H. Widiarta, and R. Piplani, “Forecasting aggregate
time series with intermittent subaggregate components: top-down versus
bottom-up forecasting,” IMA Journal of Management Mathematics, vol.
19, no. 3, pp. 275–287, Jul. 2008.
[16] Z. Wang, W. S. Wang, C. Liu, Z. Wang, and Y. H. Hou, “Probabilistic
forecast for multiple wind farms based on regular vine copulas,” IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 578–589, Jan. 2018.
[17] Y. Wang, Z. Zhou, A. Botterud, and K. F. Zhang, “Optimal wind power
uncertainty intervals for electricity market operation,” IEEE Transactions
on Sustainable Energy, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 199–210, Jan. 2018.
[18] H. G. Zhang, Y. S. Li, D. W. Gao, and J. G. Zhou, “Distributed
optimal energy management for energy internet,” IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Informatics, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 3081–3097, Dec. 2017.
[19] R. Tahmasebifar, M. K. Sheikh-El-Eslami, and R. Kheirollahi, “Point
and interval forecasting of real-time and day-ahead electricity prices by
a novel hybrid approach,” IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution,
vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 2173–2183, Jul. 2017.
[20] M. Dicorato, G. Forte, M. Pisani, and M. Trovato, “Planning and
operating combined wind-storage system in electricity market,” IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 209–217, Apr.
2012.
[21] Rachel Carnegie, Douglas Gotham, David Nderitu, Paul V. Preckel,
“Utility Scale Energy Storage Systems”, State Utility Forecasting Group,
June 2013.
[22] Q. Zhang, X. R. Li, M. Yang, Y. J. Cao, and P. Q. Li, “A method for
configuring mixed energy storage capacity with the highest net benefit,”
Transactions of China Electrotechnical Society, vol. 31, no. 14, pp. 40–
48, Jul. 2016.
[23] L. Xu, G. Ma, P. Cheng, R. W. Li, Z. W. Liu, and P. Li, “Summary of
hydrogen storage technology and its application prospect in hydrogen
storage,” Smart Grid, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 166–171, Feb. 2016.
[24] D. F. Jiang, ”Feasibility analysis of hydrogen and oxygen combined
cycle and wind energy coupled power generation system,” Ph.D. disser-
tation, Dept. North China Electric Power University, Beijing, 2012.
[25] D. Chade, T. Miklis, and D. Dvorak, “Feasibility study of wind-to-
hydrogen system for Arctic remote locations–grimsey island case study,”
Renewable Energy, vol. 76, pp. 204–211, Apr. 2015.
[26] S. Teleke, M. E. Baran, S. Bhattacharya, and A. Q. Huang, “Rule-based
control of battery energy storage for dispatching intermittent renewable
sources,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 1, no. 3, pp.
117–124, Oct. 2010.
[27] K. Deb, A. Pratap, S. Agarwal, and T. Meyarivan, “A fast and elitist
multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II,” IEEE Transactions on
Evolutionary Computation, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 182–197, 2002.
Zhenyuan Zhang (S’12−M’16) received the B.S.
degree from Chang’an University, Xi’an, China,
and the Ph.D. degree from the University of Texas
at Arlington, Arlington, USA, in 2007 and 2015,
respectively. He is currently an Associate Professor
of the School of Energy Science and Engineering
in University of Electronic Science and Technology
of China (UESTC). His focus lies in power system
analysis and power system optimization, but he
has also been involved in smart grids, renewable
energy, electrical safety analysis, arc flash analysis
and power market researches. Since 2010 he has served as the project associate
for the IEEE/NFPA Arc Flash Research Project.
Yun Zhang (S’17) received her B.S. degree in
Electrical Engineering from Northwest A&F Univer-
sity, Shanxi, China, in 2015. Her research interests
are renewable energy, energy storage and power
market. Currently, she is pursuing the M.S. degree
of electrical engineering at UESTC.
Qi Huang (M’03−SM’09) received his B.S. degree
in Electrical Engineering from Fuzhou University
in 1996, M.S. degree from Tsinghua University in
1999, and Ph.D. degree from Arizona State Univer-
sity in 2003. He is currently a professor at UESTC,
the Executive Dean of School of Energy Science and
Engineering, UESTC, and the director of Sichuan
State Provincial Lab of Power System Wide-area
Measurement and Control. He is a member of IEEE
since 1999. His current research and academic in-
terests include power system instrumentation, power
system monitoring and control, and power system high performance comput-
ing.
Wei-Jen Lee (M’85−SM’97−F’07) received the
B.S. and M.S. degrees from National Taiwan Uni-
versity, Taipei, Taiwan, China, and the Ph.D. degree
from the University of Texas, Arlington, in 1978,
1980, and 1985, respectively, all in Electrical Engi-
neering. He is currently a Professor of the Electrical
Engineering Department and the Director of the
Energy Systems Research Center. Prof. Lee has been
involved in research on arc flash and electrical safety,
utility deregulation, renewable energy, smart grid,
microgrid, load forecasting, power quality, distribu-
tion automation and demand side management, power systems analysis, online
real time equipment diagnostic and prognostic system, and microcomputer
based instrumentation for power systems monitoring, measurement, control,
and protection. Since 2008 he has also served as the project manager for the
IEEE/NFPA Arc Flash Research Project. Prof. Lee is a Fellow of IEEE and
registered Professional Engineer in the State of Texas.